1. I cannot
say, my dearest son Laurence, how much your learning pleasesme, and how much
I desire that you should be wise--though not one of those ofwhom it is said:
"Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputant ofthis
world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?"1 Rather,
youshould be one of those of whom it is written, "The multitude of the wise
is the healthof the world"2; and also you should be the kind of man the
apostle wishes those mento be to whom he said,3 "I would have you be wise in
goodness and simple in evil."42. Human wisdom consists in piety. This you
have in the book of the saintlyJob, for there he writes that Wisdom herself
said to man, "Behold, piety iswisdom."5 If, then, you ask what kind of piety
she was speaking of, you will find itmore distinctly designated by the Greek
term qeosebeia, literally, "the service ofGod." The Greek has still another
word for "piety," ensebeia, which also signifies"proper service." This too
refers chiefly to the service of God. But no term is betterthan qeosebeia,
which clearly expresses the idea of the man's service of God as thesource of
human wisdom.When you ask me to be brief, you do not expect me to speak of
great issues ina few sentences, do you? Is not this rather what you desire:
a brief summary or ashort treatise on the proper mode of worshipping
[serving] God?3. If I should answer, "God should be worshipped in faith,
hope, love," youwould doubtless reply that this was shorter than you wished,
and might then begfor a brief explication of what each of these three means:
What should be believed,what should be hoped for, and what should be loved?
If I should answer thesequestions, you would then have everything you asked
for in your letter. If you havekept a copy of it, you can easily refer to
it. If not, recall your questions as I discussthem.4. It is your desire,
as you wrote, to have from me a book, a sort ofenchiridion,6 as it might be
called--something to have "at hand"--that deals withyour questions. What is
to be sought after above all else? What, in view of the diversheresies, is
to be avoided above all else? How far does reason support religion; orwhat
happens to reason when the issues involved concern faith alone; what is
thebeginning and end of our endeavor? What is the most comprehensive of
allexplanations? What is the certain and distinctive foundation of the
catholic faith?You would have the answers to all these questions if you
really understood what aman should believe, what he should hope for, and
what he ought to love. For theseare the chief things--indeed, the only
things--to seek for in religion. He who turnsaway from them is either a
complete stranger to the name of Christ or else he is aheretic. Things that
arise in sensory experience, or that are analyzed by theintellect, may be
demonstrated by the reason. But in matters that pass beyond thescope of the
physical senses, which we have not settled by our own understanding,and
cannot--here we must believe, without hesitation, the witness of those men
by1I Cor. 1:20.2Wis. 6:26 (Vulgate).3Rom. 16:19.4A later
interpolation, not found in the best MSS., adds, "As no one can exist from
himself, so also no one can be wise in himself save only as he is enlightened by
Him of whom it is written, 'All wisdom is from God' [Ecclus. 1:1]."5Job
28:28.6A transliteration of the Greek egceiridion, literally, a handbook or
manual.3whom the Scriptures (rightly called divine) were composed, men
who were divinelyaided in their senses and their minds to see and even to
foresee the things aboutwhich they testify.5. But, as this faith, which
works by love,7 begins to penetrate the soul, ittends, through the vital
power of goodness, to change into sight, so that the holy andperfect in
heart catch glimpses of that ineffable beauty whose full vision is
ourhighest happiness. Here, then, surely, is the answer to your question
about thebeginning and the end of our endeavor. We begin in faith, we are
perfected in sight.8This likewise is the most comprehensive of all
explanations. As for the certain anddistinctive foundation of the catholic
faith, it is Christ. "For other foundation," saidthe apostle, "can no man
lay save that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus."9Nor should it be
denied that this is the distinctive basis of the catholic faith, justbecause
it appears that it is common to us and to certain heretics as well. For if
wethink carefully about the meaning of Christ, we shall see that among some
of theheretics who wish to be called Christians, the name of Christ is held
in honor, butthe reality itself is not among them. To make all this plain
would take too long--because we would then have to review all the heresies
that have been, the ones thatnow exist, and those which could exist under
the label "Christian," and we wouldhave to show that what we have said of
all is true of each of them. Such a discussionwould take so many volumes as
to make it seem endless.106. You have asked for an enchiridion, something
you could carry around, notjust baggage for your bookshelf. Therefore we may
return to these three ways inwhich, as we said, God should be served: faith,
hope, love. It is easy to say what oneought to believe, what to hope for,
and what to love. But to defend our doctrinesagainst the calumnies of those
who think differently is a more difficult and detailedtask. If one is to
have this wisdom, it is not enough just to put an enchiridion in thehand. It
is also necessary that a great zeal be kindled in the
heart.

CHAPTER IITHE CREED AND THE LORD'S PRAYER AS GUIDES TO
THEINTERPRETATION OF THE THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES OF FAITH, HOPE, AND
LOVE

7. Let us begin, for example, with the Symbol11 and the
Lord's Prayer. Whatis shorter to hear or to read? What is more easily
memorized? Since through sin thehuman race stood grievously burdened by
great misery and in deep need of mercy, aprophet, preaching of the time of
God's grace, said, "And it shall be that all whoinvoke the Lord's name will
be saved."12 Thus, we have the Lord's Prayer. Later, theapostle, when he
wished to commend this same grace, remembered this prophetictestimony and
promptly added, "But how shall they invoke him in whom they havenot
believed?"13 Thus, we have the Symbol. In these two we have the
threetheological virtues working together: faith believes; hope and love
pray. Yet withoutfaith nothing else is possible; thus faith prays too. This,
then, is the meaning of thesaying, "How shall they invoke him in whom they
have not believed?"8. Now, is it possible to hope for what we do not believe
in? We can, of course,believe in something that we do not hope for. Who
among the faithful does not7Cf. Gal. 5:6.8Cf. I Cor. 13:10, 11.9I
Cor. 3:11.10Already, very early in his ministry (397), Augustine had written
De agone Christiano, in which he had reviewed and refuted a full score of
heresies threatening the orthodox faith.11The Apostles' Creed. Cf.
Augustine's early essay On Faith and the Creed.12Joel 2:32.13Rom.
10:14.4believe in the punishment of the impious? Yet he does not hope
for it, and whoeverbelieves that such a punishment is threatening him and
draws back in horror fromit is more rightly said to fear than to hope. A
poet, distinguishing between these twofeelings, said, "Let those who dread
be allowed to hope,"14but another poet, and a better one, did not put it
rightly:"Here, if I could have hoped for [i.e., foreseen]such a grievous
blow..." 15Indeed, some grammarians use this as an example of inaccurate
language andcomment, "He said 'to hope' when he should have said 'to
fear.'"Therefore faith may refer to evil things as well as to good, since we
believe inboth the good and evil. Yet faith is good, not evil. Moreover,
faith refers to thingspast and present and future. For we believe that
Christ died; this is a past event.We believe that he sitteth at the Father's
right hand; this is present. We believethat he will come as our judge; this
is future. Again, faith has to do with our ownaffairs and with those of
others. For everyone believes, both about himself and otherpersons--and
about things as well--that at some time he began to exist and that hehas not
existed forever. Thus, not only about men, but even about angels, we
believemany things that have a bearing on religion.But hope deals only
with good things, and only with those which lie in thefuture, and which
pertain to the man who cherishes the hope. Since this is so, faithmust be
distinguished from hope: they are different terms and likewise
differentconcepts. Yet faith and hope have this in common: they refer to
what is not seen,whether this unseen is believed in or hoped for. Thus in
the Epistle to the Hebrews,which is used by the enlightened defenders of the
catholic rule of faith, faith is saidto be "the conviction of things not
seen."16 However, when a man maintains thatneither words nor witnesses nor
even arguments, but only the evidence of presentexperience, determine his
faith, he still ought not to be called absurd or told, "Youhave seen;
therefore you have not believed." For it does not follow that unless athing
is not seen it cannot be believed. Still it is better for us to use the term
"faith,"as we are taught in "the sacred eloquence,"17 to refer to things not
seen. And as forhope, the apostle says: "Hope that is seen is not hope. For
if a man sees a thing, whydoes he hope for it? If, however, we hope for what
we do not see, we then wait for itin patience."18 When, therefore, our good
is believed to be future, this is the samething as hoping for it.What,
then, shall I say of love, without which faith can do nothing? There canbe
no true hope without love. Indeed, as the apostle James says, "Even the
demonsbelieve and tremble."19Yet they neither hope nor love. Instead,
believing as we do that what we hopefor and love is coming to pass, they
tremble. Therefore, the apostle Paul approvesand commends the faith that
works by love and that cannot exist without hope.Thus it is that love is not
without hope, hope is not without love, and neither hopenor love are without
faith.14Lucan, Pharsalia, II, 15.15Virgil, Aeneid, IV, 419. The context
of this quotation is Dido's lament over Aeneas' prospective abandonment of her.
She is saying that if she could have foreseen such a disaster, she would have
been able to bear it. Augustine's criticism here is a literalistic
quibble.16Heb. 11:1.17Sacra eloquia--a favorite phrase of Augustine's
for the Bible.18Rom. 8:24, 25 (Old Latin).19James
2:19.5

CHAPTER IIIGOD THE CREATOR OF ALL;AND
THE GOODNESS OF ALL CREATION

9. Wherefore, when it is asked what
we ought to believe in matters ofreligion, the answer is not to be sought in
the exploration of the nature of things[rerum natura], after the manner of
those whom the Greeks called "physicists."20Nor should we be dismayed if
Christians are ignorant about the properties and thenumber of the basic
elements of nature, or about the motion, order, and deviationsof the stars,
the map of the heavens, the kinds and nature of animals, plants,stones,
springs, rivers, and mountains; about the divisions of space and time,
aboutthe signs of impending storms, and the myriad other things which these
"physicists"have come to understand, or think they have. For even these men,
gifted with suchsuperior insight, with their ardor in study and their
abundant leisure, exploringsome of these matters by human conjecture and
others through historical inquiry,have not yet learned everything there is
to know. For that matter, many of thethings they are so proud to have
discovered are more often matters of opinion thanof verified
knowledge.For the Christian, it is enough to believe that the cause of all
created things,whether in heaven or on earth, whether visible or invisible,
is nothing other thanthe goodness of the Creator, who is the one and the
true God.21 Further, theChristian believes that nothing exists save God
himself and what comes from him;and he believes that God is triune, i.e.,
the Father, and the Son begotten of theFather, and the Holy Spirit
proceeding from the same Father, but one and the sameSpirit of the Father
and the Son.10. By this Trinity, supremely and equally and immutably good,
were allthings created. But they were not created supremely, equally, nor
immutably good.Still, each single created thing is good, and taken as a
whole they are very good,because together they constitute a universe of
admirable beauty.11. In this universe, even what is called evil, when it is
rightly ordered andkept in its place, commends the good more eminently,
since good things yieldgreater pleasure and praise when compared to the bad
things. For the OmnipotentGod, whom even the heathen acknowledge as the
Supreme Power over all, wouldnot allow any evil in his works, unless in his
omnipotence and goodness, as theSupreme Good, he is able to bring forth good
out of evil. What, after all, is anythingwe call evil except the privation
of good? In animal bodies, for instance, sickness andwounds are nothing but
the privation of health. When a cure is effected, the evilswhich were
present (i.e., the sickness and the wounds) do not retreat and goelsewhere.
Rather, they simply do not exist any more. For such evil is not asubstance;
the wound or the disease is a defect of the bodily substance which, as
asubstance, is good. Evil, then, is an accident, i.e., a privation of that
good which iscalled health. Thus, whatever defects there are in a soul are
privations of a naturalgood. When a cure takes place, they are not
transferred elsewhere but, since theyare no longer present in the state of
health, they no longer exist at all.2220One of the standard titles of early
Greek philosophical treatises was peri fnsewz, which would translate into Latin
as De rerum natura. This is, in fact, the title of Lucretius' famous poem, the
greatest philosophical work written in classical Latin.21This basic motif
appears everywhere in Augustine's thought as the very foundation of his whole
system.22This section (Chs. III and IV) is the most explicit statement of a
major motif which pervades the whole of Augustinian metaphysics. We see it in
his earliest writings, Soliloquies, 1, 2, and De ordine,II, 7. It is
obviously a part of the Neoplatonic heritage which Augustine appropriated for
hisChristian philosophy. The good is positive, constructive, essential; evil
is privative, destructive,6

CHAPTER IVTHE PROBLEM
OF EVIL

12. All of nature, therefore, is good, since the Creator
of all nature issupremely good. But nature is not supremely and immutably
good as is the Creatorof it. Thus the good in created things can be
diminished and augmented. For good tobe diminished is evil; still, however
much it is diminished, something must remainof its original nature as long
as it exists at all. For no matter what kind or howeverinsignificant a thing
may be, the good which is its "nature" cannot be destroyedwithout the thing
itself being destroyed. There is good reason, therefore, to praisean
uncorrupted thing, and if it were indeed an incorruptible thing which could
notbe destroyed, it would doubtless be all the more worthy of praise. When,
however, athing is corrupted, its corruption is an evil because it is, by
just so much, a privationof the good. Where there is no privation of the
good, there is no evil. Where there isevil, there is a corresponding
diminution of the good. As long, then, as a thing isbeing corrupted, there
is good in it of which it is being deprived; and in this process,if
something of its being remains that cannot be further corrupted, this will then
bean incorruptible entity [natura incorruptibilis], and to this great good
it will havecome through the process of corruption. But even if the
corruption is not arrested, itstill does not cease having some good of which
it cannot be further deprived. If,however, the corruption comes to be total
and entire, there is no good left either,because it is no longer an entity
at all. Wherefore corruption cannot consume thegood without also consuming
the thing itself. Every actual entity [natura] istherefore good; a greater
good if it cannot be corrupted, a lesser good if it can be. Yetonly the
foolish and unknowing can deny that it is still good even when
corrupted.Whenever a thing is consumed by corruption, not even the
corruption remains, for itis nothing in itself, having no subsistent being
in which to exist.13. From this it follows that there is nothing to be
called evil if there isnothing good. A good that wholly lacks an evil aspect
is entirely good. Where thereis some evil in a thing, its good is defective
or defectible. Thus there can be no evilwhere there is no good. This leads
us to a surprising conclusion: that, since everybeing, in so far as it is a
being, is good, if we then say that a defective thing is bad, itwould seem
to mean that we are saying that what is evil is good, that only what isgood
is ever evil and that there is no evil apart from something good. This is
becauseevery actual entity is good [omnis natura bonum est.] Nothing evil
exists in itself,but only as an evil aspect of some actual entity.
Therefore, there can be nothing evilexcept something good. Absurd as this
sounds, nevertheless the logical connectionsof the argument compel us to it
as inevitable. At the same time, we must takewarning lest we incur the
prophetic judgment which reads: "Woe to those who callevil good and good
evil: who call darkness light and light darkness; who call thebitter sweet
and the sweet bitter."23 Moreover the Lord himself saith: "An evil manbrings
forth evil out of the evil treasure of his heart."24 What, then, is an evil
manbut an evil entity [natura mala], since man is an entity? Now, if a man
is somethinggood because he is an entity, what, then, is a bad man except an
evil good? When,however, we distinguish between these two concepts, we find
that the bad man isnot bad because he is a man, nor is he good because he is
wicked. Rather, he is agood entity in so far as he is a man, evil in so far
as he is wicked. Therefore, ifanyone says that simply to be a man is evil,
or that to be a wicked man is good, herightly falls under the prophetic
judgment: "Woe to him who calls evil good and goodparasitic on the good. It
has its origin, not in nature, but in the will. Cf. Confessions, Bk. VII,
Chs.III, V, XII-XVI; On Continence, 14-16; On the Gospel of John, Tractate
XCVIII, 7; City of God, XI,17; XII, 7-9.23 Isa. 5:20.24Matt.
12:35.7evil." For this amounts to finding fault with God's work, because
man is an entity ofGod's creation. It also means that we are praising the
defects in this particular manbecause he is a wicked person. Thus, every
entity, even if it is a defective one, in sofar as it is an entity, is good.
In so far as it is defective, it is evil.14. Actually, then, in these two
contraries we call evil and good, the rule ofthe logicians fails to apply.25
No weather is both dark and bright at the same time;no food or drink is both
sweet and sour at the same time; no body is, at the sametime and place, both
white and black, nor deformed and well-formed at the sametime. This
principle is found to apply in almost all disjunctions: two contrariescannot
coexist in a single thing. Nevertheless, while no one maintains that good
andevil are not contraries, they can not only coexist, but the evil cannot
exist at allwithout the good, or in a thing that is not a good. On the other
hand, the good canexist without evil. For a man or an angel could exist and
yet not be wicked, whereasthere cannot be wickedness except in a man or an
angel. It is good to be a man, goodto be an angel; but evil to be wicked.
These two contraries are thus coexistent, sothat if there were no good in
what is evil, then the evil simply could not be, since itcan have no mode in
which to exist, nor any source from which corruption springs,unless it be
something corruptible. Unless this something is good, it cannot becorrupted,
because corruption is nothing more than the deprivation of the good.Evils,
therefore, have their source in the good, and unless they are parasitic
onsomething good, they are not anything at all. There is no other source
whence anevil thing can come to be. If this is the case, then, in so far as
a thing is an entity, itis unquestionably good. If it is an incorruptible
entity, it is a great good. But even ifit is a corruptible entity, it still
has no mode of existence except as an aspect ofsomething that is good. Only
by corrupting something good can corruption inflictinjury.15. But when
we say that evil has its source in the good, do not suppose thatthis denies
our Lord's judgment: "A good tree cannot bear evil fruit."26 This cannotbe,
even as the Truth himself declareth: "Men do not gather grapes from
thorns,"since thorns cannot bear grapes. Nevertheless, from good soil we can
see both vinesand thorns spring up. Likewise, just as a bad tree does not
grow good fruit, so alsoan evil will does not produce good deeds. From a
human nature, which is good initself, there can spring forth either a good
or an evil will. There was no other placefrom whence evil could have arisen
in the first place except from the nature--good initself--of an angel or a
man. This is what our Lord himself most clearly shows in thepassage about
the trees and the fruits, for he said: "Make the tree good and thefruits
will be good, or make the tree bad and its fruits will be bad."27 This
iswarning enough that bad fruit cannot grow on a good tree nor good fruit on
a badone. Yet from that same earth to which he was referring, both sorts of
trees cangrow.

CHAPTER VTHE KINDS AND DEGREES OF
ERROR

16. This being the case, when that verse of Maro's gives us
pleasure,"Happy is he who can understand the causes of things,"28it
still does not follow that our felicity depends upon our knowing the causes of
thegreat physical processes in the world, which are hidden in the secret
maze of25This refers to Aristotle's well-known principle of "the excluded
middle."26Matt. 7:18.27Cf. Matt. 12:33.28Virgil, Georgios, II,
490.8nature, "Whence earthquakes, whose force swells the sea to
flood,so that they burst their bounds and then subside again,"29and
other such things as this.But we ought to know the causes of good and evil
in things, at least as far asmen may do so in this life, filled as it is
with errors and distress, in order to avoidthese errors and distresses. We
must always aim at that true felicity whereinmisery does not distract, nor
error mislead. If it is a good thing to understand thecauses of physical
motion, there is nothing of greater concern in these matterswhich we ought
to understand than our own health. But when we are in ignoranceof such
things, we seek out a physician, who has seen how the secrets of heaven
andearth still remain hidden from us, and what patience there must be in
unknowing.17. Although we should beware of error wherever possible, not only
in greatmatters but in small ones as well, it is impossible not to be
ignorant of many things.Yet it does not follow that one falls into error out
of ignorance alone. If someonethinks he knows what he does not know, if he
approves as true what is actuallyfalse, this then is error, in the proper
sense of the term. Obviously, much dependson the question involved in the
error, for in one and the same question one naturallyprefers the instructed
to the ignorant, the expert to the blunderer, and this withgood reason. In a
complex issue, however, as when one man knows one thing andanother man knows
something else, if the former knowledge is more useful and thelatter is less
useful or even harmful, who in this latter case would not preferignorance?
There are some things, after all, that it is better not to know than toknow.
Likewise, there is sometimes profit in error--but on a journey, not
inmorals.30 This sort of thing happened to us once, when we mistook the way
at acrossroads and did not go by the place where an armed gang of Donatists
lay in waitto ambush us. We finally arrived at the place where we were
going, but only by aroundabout way, and upon learning of the ambush, we were
glad to have erred andgave thanks to God for our error. Who would doubt, in
such a situation, that theerring traveler is better off than the unerring
brigand? This perhaps explains themeaning of our finest poet, when he speaks
for an unhappy lover:"When I saw [her] I was undone, and fatal error swept
me away,"31for there is such a thing as a fortunate mistake which not only
does no harm butactually does some good.But now for a more careful
consideration of the truth in this business. To errmeans nothing more than
to judge as true what is in fact false, and as false what istrue. It means
to be certain about the uncertain, uncertain about the certain,whether it be
certainly true or certainly false. This sort of error in the mind
isdeforming and improper, since the fitting and proper thing would be to be
able tosay, in speech or judgment: "Yes, yes. No, no."32 Actually, the
wretched lives we leadcome partly from this: that sometimes if they are not
to be entirely lost, error isunavoidable. It is different in that higher
life where Truth itself is the life of oursouls, where none deceives and
none is deceived. In this life men deceive and aredeceived, and are actually
worse off when they deceive by lying than when they aredeceived by believing
lies. Yet our rational mind shrinks from falsehood, andnaturally avoids
error as much as it can, so that even a deceiver is unwilling to be29Ibid.,
479.30Sed in via pedum, non in via morum.31Virgil, Eclogue, VIII, 42.
The context of the passage is Damon's complaint over his faithless Nyssa; he is
here remembering the first time he ever saw her--when he was twelve! Cf.
Theocritus, II, 82.32Cf. Matt. 5:37.9deceived by somebody else.33
For the liar thinks he does not deceive himself andthat he deceives only
those who believe him. Indeed, he does not err in his lying, ifhe himself
knows what the truth is. But he is deceived in this, that he supposes
thathis lie does no harm to himself, when actually every sin harms the one
who commitsit more that it does the one who suffers
it.

CHAPTER VITHE PROBLEM OF LYING

18. Here a most
difficult and complex issue arises which I once dealt with in alarge book,
in response to the urgent question whether it is ever the duty of arighteous
man to lie.34 Some go so far as to contend that in cases concerning
theworship of God or even the nature of God, it is sometimes a good and
pious deed tospeak falsely. It seems to me, however, that every lie is a
sin, albeit there is a greatdifference depending on the intention and the
topic of the lie. He does not sin asmuch who lies in the attempt to be
helpful as the man who lies as a part of adeliberate wickedness. Nor does
one who, by lying, sets a traveler on the wrong roaddo as much harm as one
who, by a deceitful lie, perverts the way of a life. Obviously,no one should
be adjudged a liar who speaks falsely what he sincerely supposes isthe
truth, since in his case he does not deceive but rather is deceived. Likewise,
aman is not a liar, though he could be charged with rashness, when he
incautiouslyaccepts as true what is false. On the other hand, however, that
man is a liar in hisown conscience who speaks the truth supposing that it is
a falsehood. For as far ashis soul is concerned, since he did not say what
he believed, he did not tell the truth,even though the truth did come out in
what he said. Nor is a man to be cleared ofthe charge of lying whose mouth
unknowingly speaks the truth while his consciousintention is to lie. If we
do not consider the things spoken of, but only the intentionsof the one
speaking, he is the better man who unknowingly speaks falsely--becausehe
judges his statement to be true--than the one who unknowingly speaks the
truthwhile in his heart he is attempting to deceive. For the first man does
not have oneintention in his heart and another in his word, whereas the
other, whatever be thefacts in his statement, still "has one thought locked
in his heart, another ready onhis tongue,"35 which is the very essence of
lying. But when we do consider the thingsspoken of, it makes a great
difference in what respect one is deceived or lies. To bedeceived is a
lesser evil than to lie, as far as a man's intentions are concerned. But
itis far more tolerable that a man should lie about things not connected
with religionthan for one to be deceived in matters where faith and
knowledge are prerequisiteto the proper service of God. To illustrate what I
mean by examples: If one man liesby saying that a dead man is alive, and
another man, being deceived, believes thatChrist will die again after some
extended future period--would it not beincomparably better to lie in the
first case than to be deceived in the second? Andwould it not be a lesser
evil to lead someone into the former error than to be led bysomeone into the
latter?19. In some things, then, we are deceived in great matters; in
others, small.In some of them no harm is done; in others, even good results.
It is a great evil for a33Cf. Confessions, Bk. X, Ch. XXIII.34Ad
consentium contra mendacium, CSEL (J. Zycha, ed.), Vol. 41, pp. 469-528; also
Migne, PL, 40,c. 517-548; English translation by H.B. Jaffee in Deferrari,
St. Augustine: Treatises on VariousSubjects (The Fathers of the Church, New
York, 1952), pp. 113-179. This had been written about a year earlier than the
Enchiridion. Augustine had also written another treatise On Lying much earlier,
c. 395; see De mendacio in CSEL (J. Zycha, ed.), Vol. 41, pp. 413-466; Migne,
PL, 40, c. 487-518; English translation by M.S. Muldowney in Deferrari, op.
cit., pp. 47-109. This summary of his position here represents no change of view
whatever on this question. 35Sallust, The War with Catiline, X,
6-7.10man to be deceived so as not to believe what would lead him to
life eternal, or whatwould lead to eternal death. But it is a small evil to
be deceived by crediting afalsehood as the truth in a matter where one
brings on himself some temporalsetback which can then be turned to good use
by being borne in faithful patience--asfor example, when someone judges a
man to be good who is actually bad, andconsequently has to suffer evil on
his account. Or, take the man who believes a badman to be good, yet suffers
no harm at his hand. He is not badly deceived nor wouldthe prophetic
condemnation fall on him: "Woe to those who call evil good." For weshould
understand that this saying refers to the things in which men are evil
andnot to the men themselves. Hence, he who calls adultery a good thing may
be rightlyaccused by the prophetic word. But if he calls a man good
supposing him to bechaste and not knowing that he is an adulterer, such a
man is not deceived in hisdoctrine of good and evil, but only as to the
secrets of human conduct. He calls theman good on the basis of what he
supposed him to be, and this is undoubtedly agood thing. Moreover, he calls
adultery bad and chastity good. But he calls thisparticular man good in
ignorance of the fact that he is an adulterer and not chaste.In similar
fashion, if one escapes an injury through an error, as I mentioned
beforehappened to me on that journey, there is even something good that
accrues to a manthrough his mistakes. But when I say that in such a case a
man may be deceivedwithout suffering harm therefrom, or even may gain some
benefit thereby, I am notsaying that error is not a bad thing, nor that it
is a positively good thing. I speakonly of the evil which did not happen or
the good which did happen, through theerror, which was not caused by the
error itself but which came out of it. Error, initself and by itself,
whether a great error in great matters or a small error in smallaffairs, is
always a bad thing. For who, except in error, denies that it is bad
toapprove the false as though it were the truth, or to disapprove the truth
as though itwere falsehood, or to hold what is certain as if it were
uncertain, or what isuncertain as if it were certain? It is one thing to
judge a man good who is actuallybad--this is an error. It is quite another
thing not to suffer harm from somethingevil if the wicked man whom we
supposed to be good actually does nothing harmfulto us. It is one thing to
suppose that this particular road is the right one when it isnot. It is
quite another thing that, from this error--which is a bad
thing--somethinggood actually turns out, such as being saved from the
onslaught of wicked men.

CHAPTER VIIDISPUTED
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LIMITSOF KNOWLEDGE AND CERTAINTY IN VARIOUS
MATTERS

20. I do not rightly know whether errors of this sort
should be called sins--when one thinks well of a wicked man, not knowing
what his character really is, orwhen, instead of our physical perception,
similar perceptions occur which weexperience in the spirit (such as the
illusion of the apostle Peter when he thought hewas seeing a vision but was
actually being liberated from fetters and chains by theangel36) Or in
perceptual illusions when we think something is smooth which isactually
rough, or something sweet which is bitter, something fragrant which
isputrid, that a noise is thunder when it is actually a wagon passing by,
when onetakes this man for that, or when two men look alike, as happens in
the case oftwins--whence our poet speaks of "a pleasant error for
parents"37--I say I do notknow whether these and other such errors should be
called sins.Nor am I at the moment trying to deal with that knottiest of
questions whichbaffled the most acute men of the Academy, whether a wise man
ought ever toaffirm anything positively lest he be involved in the error of
affirming as true whatmay be false, since all questions, as they assert, are
either mysterious [occulta] or36Cf. Acts 12:9.37Virgil, Aeneid, X,
392.11uncertain. On these points I wrote three books in the early stages
of my conversionbecause my further progress was being blocked by objections
like this which stood atthe very threshold of my understanding.38 It was
necessary to overcome the despairof being unable to attain to truth, which
is what their arguments seemed to lead oneto. Among them every error is
deemed a sin, and this can be warded off only by asystematic suspension of
positive assent. Indeed they say it is an error if someonebelieves in what
is uncertain. For them, however, nothing is certain in humanexperience,
because of the deceitful likeness of falsehood to the truth, so that even
ifwhat appears to be true turns out to be true indeed, they will still
dispute it withthe most acute and even shameless arguments.Among us, on
the other hand, "the righteous man lives by faith."39 Now, ifyou take away
positive affirmation,40 you take away faith, for without positiveaffirmation
nothing is believed. And there are truths about things unseen, andunless
they are believed, we cannot attain to the happy life, which is nothing
lessthan life eternal. It is a question whether we ought to argue with those
who professthemselves ignorant not only about the eternity yet to come but
also about theirpresent existence, for they [the Academics] even argue that
they do not know whatthey cannot help knowing. For no one can "not know"
that he himself is alive. If heis not alive, he cannot "not know" about it
or anything else at all, because either toknow or to "not know" implies a
living subject. But, in such a case, by not positivelyaffirming that they
are alive, the skeptics ward off the appearance of error inthemselves, yet
they do make errors simply by showing themselves alive; one cannoterr who is
not alive. That we live is therefore not only true, but it is
altogethercertain as well. And there are many things that are thus true and
certainconcerning which, if we withhold positive assent, this ought not to
be regarded as ahigher wisdom but actually a sort of dementia.21. In
those things which do not concern our attainment of the Kingdom ofGod, it
does not matter whether they are believed in or not, or whether they aretrue
or are supposed to be true or false. To err in such questions, to mistake
onething for another, is not to be judged as a sin or, if it is, as a small
and light one. Insum, whatever kind or how much of an error these miscues
may be, it does notinvolve the way that leads to God, which is the faith of
Christ which works throughlove. This way of life was not abandoned in that
error so dear to parents concerningthe twins.41 Nor did the apostle Peter
deviate from this way when he thought hesaw a vision and so mistook one
thing for something else. In his case, he did notdiscover the actual
situation until after the angel, by whom he was freed, haddeparted from him.
Nor did the patriarch Jacob deviate from this way when hebelieved that his
son, who was in fact alive, had been devoured by a wild beast. Wemay err
through false impressions of this kind, with our faith in God still safe,
nordo we thus leave the way that leads us to him. Nevertheless, such
mistakes, even ifthey are not sins, must still be listed among the evils of
this life, which is so readilysubject to vanity that we judge the false for
true, reject the true for the false, andhold as uncertain what is actually
certain. For even if these mistakes do not affectthat faith by which we move
forward to affirm truth and eternal beatitude, yet theyare not unrelated to
the misery in which we still exist. Actually, of course, we wouldbe deceived
in nothing at all, either in our souls or our physical senses, if we
werealready enjoying that true and perfected happiness.22. Every lie,
then, must be called a sin, because every man ought to speak38This refers to
one of the first of the Cassiciacum dialogues, Contra Academicos. The gist
ofAugustine's refutation of skepticism is in III, 23ff. Throughout his whole
career he continued to maintain this position: that certain knowledge begins
with self-knowledge. Cf. Confessions, Bk. V, Ch. X, 19; see also City of God,
XI, xxvii.39Hab. 2:4; Rom. 1:17. 40A direct contrast between suspensus
assenso--the watchword of the Academics--and assensio, the badge of Christian
certitude. 41See above, VII, 90.12what is in his heart--not only when he
himself knows the truth, but even when heerrs and is deceived, as a man may
be. This is so whether it be true or is onlysupposed to be true when it is
not. But a man who lies says the opposite of what isin his heart, with the
deliberate intent to deceive. Now clearly, language, in itsproper function,
was developed not as a means whereby men could deceive oneanother, but as a
medium through which a man could communicate his thought toothers. Wherefore
to use language in order to deceive, and not as it was designed tobe used,
is a sin.Nor should we suppose that there is any such thing as a lie that is
not a sin,just because we suppose that we can sometimes help somebody by
lying. For wecould also do this by stealing, as when a secret theft from a
rich man who does notfeel the loss is openly given to a pauper who greatly
appreciates the gain. Yet no onewould say that such a theft was not a sin.
Or again, we could also "help" bycommitting adultery, if someone appeared to
be dying for love if we would notconsent to her desire and who, if she
lived, might be purified by repentance. But itcannot be denied that such an
adultery would be a sin. If, then, we hold chastity insuch high regard,
wherein has truth offended us so that although chastity must notbe violated
by adultery, even for the sake of some other good, yet truth may beviolated
by lying? That men have made progress toward the good, when they willnot lie
save for the sake of human values, is not to be denied. But what is
rightlypraised in such a forward step, and perhaps even rewarded, is their
good will andnot their deceit. The deceit may be pardoned, but certainly
ought not to be praised,especially among the heirs of the New Covenant to
whom it has been said, "Let yourspeech be yes, yes; no, no: for what is more
than this comes from evil."42 Yet becauseof what this evil does, never
ceasing to subvert this mortality of ours, even the jointheirs of Christ
themselves pray, "Forgive us our debts."43

CHAPTER VIIITHE PLIGHT
OF MAN AFTER THE FALL

23. With this much said, within the
necessary brevity of this kind of treatise,as to what we need to know about
the causes of good and evil--enough to lead us inthe way toward the Kingdom,
where there will be life without death, truth withouterror, happiness
without anxiety--we ought not to doubt in any way that the causeof
everything pertaining to our good is nothing other than the bountiful goodness
ofGod himself. The cause of evil is the defection of the will of a being who
is mutablygood from the Good which is immutable. This happened first in the
case of theangels and, afterward, that of man.24. This was the primal
lapse of the rational creature, that is, his firstprivation of the good. In
train of this there crept in, even without his willing it,ignorance of the
right things to do and also an appetite for noxious things. Andthese brought
along with them, as their companions, error and misery. When thesetwo evils
are felt to be imminent, the soul's motion in flight from them is called
fear.Moreover, as the soul's appetites are satisfied by things harmful or at
least inane--and as it fails to recognize the error of its ways--it falls
victim to unwholesomepleasures or may even be exhilarated by vain joys. From
these tainted springs ofaction--moved by the lash of appetite rather than a
feeling of plenty--there flows outevery kind of misery which is now the lot
of rational natures.25. Yet such a nature, even in its evil state, could not
lose its appetite forblessedness. There are the evils that both men and
angels have in common, forwhose wickedness God hath condemned them in simple
justice. But man has aunique penalty as well: he is also punished by the
death of the body. God had indeedthreatened man with death as penalty if he
should sin. He endowed him with42Matt. 5:37.43Matt.
6:12.13freedom of the will in order that he might rule him by rational
command and deterhim by the threat of death. He even placed him in the
happiness of paradise in asheltered nook of life [in umbra vitae] where, by
being a good steward ofrighteousness, he would rise to better things.26.
From this state, after he had sinned, man was banished, and through hissin
he subjected his descendants to the punishment of sin and damnation, for
hehad radically corrupted them, in himself, by his sinning. As a consequence
of this,all those descended from him and his wife (who had prompted him to
sin and whowas condemned along with him at the same time)--all those born
through carnallust, on whom the same penalty is visited as for
disobedience--all these entered intothe inheritance of original sin. Through
this involvement they were led, throughdivers errors and sufferings (along
with the rebel angels, their corruptors andpossessors and companions), to
that final stage of punishment without end. "Thusby one man, sin entered
into the world and death through sin; and thus death cameupon all men, since
all men have sinned."44 By "the world" in this passage theapostle is, of
course, referring to the whole human race.27. This, then, was the situation:
the whole mass of the human race stoodcondemned, lying ruined and wallowing
in evil, being plunged from evil into eviland, having joined causes with the
angels who had sinned, it was paying the fullydeserved penalty for impious
desertion. Certainly the anger of God rests, in fulljustice, on the deeds that the wicked do freely in blind
and unbridled lust; and it ismanifest in whatever
penalties they are called on to suffer, both openly and secretly.Yet the Creator's goodness does not cease to sustain life
and vitality even in the evilangels, for were this
sustenance withdrawn, they would simply cease to exist. As formankind, although born of a corrupted and condemned stock,
he still retains thepower to form and animate his seed,
to direct his members in their temporal order,to enliven
his senses in their spatial relations, and to provide bodily nourishment.For God judged it better to bring good out of evil than not
to permit any evil to exist.And if he had willed that
there should be no reformation in the case of men, as thereis none for the wicked angels, would it not have been just
if the nature that desertedGod and, through the evil use
of his powers, trampled and transgressed the preceptsof
his Creator, which could have been easily kept--the same creature who
stubbornlyturned away from His Light and violated the
image of the Creator in himself, whohad in the evil use
of his free will broken away from the wholesome discipline ofGod's law--would it not have been just if such a being had
been abandoned by Godwholly and forever and laid under
the everlasting punishment which he deserved?Clearly God
would have done this if he were only just and not also merciful and if hehad not willed to show far more striking evidence of his
mercy by pardoning somewho were unworthy of it.

CHAPTER IXTHE REPLACEMENT OF THE FALLEN ANGELS BYELECT MEN (28-30); THE NECESSITY OF GRACE (30-32)

28. While some of the angels
deserted God in impious pride and were castinto the
lowest darkness from the brightness of their heavenly home, the remainingnumber of the angels persevered in eternal bliss and
holiness with God. For thesefaithful angels were not
descended from a single angel, lapsed and damned. Hence,the original evil did not bind them in the fetters of
inherited guilt, nor did it handthe whole company over
to a deserved punishment, as is the human lot. Instead,when he who became the devil first rose in rebellion with
his impious company andwas then with them prostrated,
the rest of the angels stood fast in pious obedienceto
the Lord and so received what the others had not had--a sure knowledge of
theireverlasting security in his unfailing
steadfastness.44Rom. 5:12.1429. Thus it pleased God, Creator and Governor of the
universe, that since thewhole multitude of the angels
had not perished in this desertion of him, those whohad
perished would remain forever in perdition, but those who had remained loyalthrough the revolt should go on rejoicing in the certain
knowledge of the blissforever theirs. From the other
part of the rational creation--that is, mankind--although it had perished as a whole through sins and
punishments, both originaland personal, God had
determined that a portion of it would be restored and wouldfill up the loss which that diabolical disaster had caused
in the angelic society. Forthis is the promise to the
saints at the resurrection, that they shall be equal to theangels of God.45Thus the heavenly
Jerusalem, our mother and the commonwealth of God,shall
not be defrauded of her full quota of citizens, but perhaps will rule over aneven larger number. We know neither the number of holy men
nor of the filthydemons, whose places are to be filled
by the sons of the holy mother, who seemedbarren in the
earth, but whose sons will abide time without end in the peace thedemons lost. But the number of those citizens, whether those
who now belong orthose who will in the future, is known
to the mind of the Maker, "who calleth intoexistence
things which are not, as though they were,"46 and "ordereth all things inmeasure and number and weight."4730.
But now, can that part of the human race to whom God hath promiseddeliverance and a place in the eternal Kingdom be restored
through the merits oftheir own works? Of course not! For
what good works could a lost soul do except ashe had
been rescued from his lostness? Could he do this by the determination of hisfree will? Of course not! For it was in the evil use of his
free will that man destroyedhimself and his will at the
same time. For as a man who kills himself is still alivewhen he kills himself, but having killed himself is then no
longer alive and cannotresuscitate himself after he has
destroyed his own life--so also sin which arises fromthe
action of the free will turns out to be victor over the will and the free will
isdestroyed. "By whom a man is overcome, to this one he
then is bound as slave."48This is clearly the judgment
of the apostle Peter. And since it is true, I ask you whatkind of liberty can one have who is bound as a slave except
the liberty that loves tosin?He
serves freely who freely does the will of his master. Accordingly he who isslave to sin is free to sin. But thereafter he will not be
free to do right unless he isdelivered from the bondage
of sin and begins to be the servant of righteousness.This, then, is true liberty: the joy that comes in doing
what is right. At the sametime, it is also devoted
service in obedience to righteous precept.But how would
a man, bound and sold, get back his liberty to do good, unlesshe could regain it from Him whose voice saith, "If the Son
shall make you free, thenyou will be free indeed"49? But
before this process begins in man, could anyone gloryin
his good works as if they were acts of his free will, when he is not yet free to
actrightly? He could do this only if, puffed up in proud
vanity, he were merely boasting.This attitude is what
the apostle was reproving when he said, "By grace you havebeen saved by faith."5031. And lest
men should arrogate to themselves saving faith as their ownwork and not understand it as a divine gift, the same
apostle who says somewhereelse that he had "obtained
mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy"51 makes here anadditional comment: "And this is not of yourselves, rather
it is a gift of God--not45Cf. Luke 20:36.46Rom. 4:17.47Wis. 11:20.48II Peter 2:19.49John 8:36.50Eph. 2:8.51I Cor. 7:25.15because of works either, lest any
man should boast."52 But then, lest it be supposedthat
the faithful are lacking in good works, he added further, "For we are hisworkmanship, created in Christ Jesus to good works, which
God hath preparedbeforehand for us to walk in
them."53We are then truly free when God ordereth our
lives, that is, formeth andcreateth us not as men--this
he hath already done--but also as good men, which heis
now doing by his grace, that we may indeed be new creatures in Christ
Jesus.54Accordingly, the prayer: "Create in me a clean
heart, O God."55 This does not mean,as far as the
natural human heart is concerned, that God hath not already createdthis.32. Once again, lest anyone
glory, if not in his own works, at least in thedetermination of his free will, as if some merit had
originated from him and as if thefreedom to do good
works had been bestowed on him as a kind of reward, let himhear the same herald of grace, announcing: "For it is God
who is at work in you bothto will and to do according to
his good will."56 And, in another place: "It is nottherefore a matter of man's willing, or of his running, but
of God's showingmercy."57 Still, it is obvious that a
man who is old enough to exercise his reasoncannot
believe, hope, or love unless he wills it, nor could he run for the prize of
hishigh calling in God without a decision of his will.
In what sense, therefore, is it "nota matter of human
willing or running but of God's showing mercy," unless it be that"the will itself is prepared by the Lord," even as it is
written?58 This saying,therefore, that "it is not a
matter of human willing or running but of God's showingmercy," means that the action is from both, that is to say,
from the will of man andfrom the mercy of God. Thus we
accept the dictum, "It is not a matter of humanwilling
or running but of God's showing mercy," as if it meant, "The will of man isnot sufficient by itself unless there is also the mercy of
God." By the same token, themercy of God is not
sufficient by itself unless there is also the will of man. But if wesay rightly that "it is not a matter of human willing or
running but of God's showingmercy," because the will of
man alone is not enough, why, then, is not the contraryrightly said, "It is not a matter of God's showing mercy but
of a man's willing," sincethe mercy of God by itself
alone is not enough? Now, actually, no Christian woulddare to say, "It is not a matter of God's showing mercy but
of man's willing," lest heexplicitly contradict the
apostle. The conclusion remains, therefore, that this saying:"Not man's willing or running but God's showing mercy," is
to be understood tomean that the whole process is
credited to God, who both prepareth the will toreceive
divine aid and aideth the will which has been thus prepared.5952Eph. 2:8, 9.53Eph. 2:10.54Cf. Gal. 6:15; II Cor. 5:17.55Ps.
51:10.56Phil. 2:13.57Rom.
9:16.58Prov. 8:35 (LXX).59From
the days at Cassiciacum till the very end, Augustine toiled with the mystery of
the primacy of God's grace and the reality of human freedom. Of two things he
was unwaveringly sure, even though they involved him in a paradox and the
appearance of confusion. The first is that God's grace is not only primary but
also sufficient as the ground and source of human willing. And against the
Pelagians and other detractors from grace, he did not hesitate to insist that
grace is irresistible and inviolable. Cf. On Grace and Free Will, 99, 41-43; On
the Predestination of the Saints, 19:10; On the Gift of Perseverance, 41; On the
Soul and Its Origin, 16; and even the Enchiridion, XXIV, 97.But he never drew from this deterministic emphasis the
conclusion that man is unfree andeverywhere roundly
rejects the not illogical corollary of his theonomism, that man's will counts
for little or nothing except as passive agent of God's will. He insists on
responsibility on man's part inresponding to the
initiatives of grace. For this emphasis, which is characteristically directed to
the faithful themselves, see On the Psalms, LXVIII, 7-8; On the Gospel of John,
Tractate, 53:6-8; and For a man's good will comes before many other gifts from
God, but not all ofthem. One of the gifts it does not
antedate is--just itself! Thus in the SacredEloquence we
read both, "His mercy goes before me,"60 and also, "His mercy shallfollow me."61 It predisposes a man before he wills, to
prompt his willing. It followsthe act of willing, lest
one's will be frustrated. Otherwise, why are we admonished topray for our enemies,62 who are plainly not now willing to
live piously, unless it bethat God is even now at work
in them and in their wills?63 Or again, why are weadmonished to ask in order to receive, unless it be that He
who grants us what wewill is he through whom it comes to
pass that we will? We pray for enemies,therefore, that
the mercy of God should go before them, as it goes before us; we prayfor ourselves that his mercy shall follow us.

CHAPTER XJESUS CHRIST THE MEDIATOR

33. Thus it was that the human race was bound in a just doom
and all menwere children of wrath. Of this wrath it is
written: "For all our days are wasted; weare ruined in
thy wrath; our years seem like a spider's web."64 Likewise Job spoke ofthis wrath: "Man born of woman is of few days and full of
trouble."65 And even theLord Jesus said of it: "He that
believes in the Son has life everlasting, but he thatbelieves not does not have life. Instead, the wrath of God
abides in him."66 He doesnot say, "It will come," but,
"It now abides." Indeed every man is born into this state.Wherefore the apostle says, "For we too were by nature
children of wrath even asthe others."67 Since men are in
this state of wrath through original sin--a conditionmade still graver and more pernicious as they compounded
more and worse sinswith it--a Mediator was required;
that is to say, a Reconciler who by offering aunique
sacrifice, of which all the sacrifices of the Law and the Prophets wereshadows, should allay that wrath. Thus the apostle says,
"For if, when we wereenemies, we were reconciled to God
by the death of his Son, even more now beingreconciled
by his blood we shall be saved from wrath through him."68 However,when God is said to be wrathful, this does not signify any
such perturbation in himas there is in the soul of a
wrathful man. His verdict, which is always just, takes thename "wrath" as a term borrowed from the language of human
feelings. This, then,is the grace of God through Jesus
Christ our Lord--that we are reconciled to Godthrough
the Mediator and receive the Holy Spirit so that we may be changed fromenemies into sons, "for as many as are led by the Spirit of
God, they are the sons ofGod."6934. It would take too long to say all that would be truly
worthy of thisMediator. Indeed, men cannot speak
properly of such matters. For who can unfoldin cogent
enough fashion this statement, that "the Word became flesh and dwelteven his severest anti-Pelagian tracts: On Grace and Free
Will, 6-8, 10, 31 and On Admonition andGrace, 2-8.60Ps. 58:11 (Vulgate).61Ps. 23:6.62Cf. Matt. 5:44.63The theme that he
had explored in Confessions, Bks. I-IX. See especially Bk. V, Chs. X, XIII;
Bk.VII, Ch. VIII; Bk. IX, Ch. I.64Cf. Ps. 90:9.65Job 14:1.66John 3:36.67Eph. 2:3.68Rom. 5:9, 10.69Rom. 8:14.17among us,"70 so that we should
then believe in "the only Son of God the FatherAlmighty,
born of the Holy Spirit and Mary the Virgin." Yet it is indeed true thatthe Word was made flesh, the flesh being assumed by the
Divinity, not the Divinitybeing changed into flesh. Of
course, by the term "flesh" we ought here to understand"man," an expression in which the part signifies the whole,
just as it is said, "Sinceby the works of the law no
flesh shall be justified,"71 which is to say, no man shallbe justified. Yet certainly we must say that in that
assumption nothing was lackingthat belongs to human
nature.But it was a nature entirely free from the bonds
of all sin. It was not a natureborn of both sexes with
fleshly desires, with the burden of sin, the guilt of which iswashed away in regeneration. Instead, it was the kind of
nature that would befittingly born of a virgin,
conceived by His mother's faith and not her fleshly desires.Now if in his being born, her virginity had been destroyed,
he would not then havebeen born of a virgin. It would
then be false (which is unthinkable) for the wholeChurch
to confess him "born of the Virgin Mary." This is the Church which,imitating his mother, daily gives birth to his members yet
remains virgin. Read, ifyou please, my letter on the
virginity of Saint Mary written to that illustrious man,Volusianus, whom I name with honor and affection.7235. Christ Jesus, Son of God, is thus both God and man. He
was God beforeall ages; he is man in this age of ours.
He is God because he is the Word of God, for"the Word
was God."73 Yet he is man also, since in the unity of his Person a rationalsoul and body is joined to the Word.Accordingly, in so far as he is God, he and the Father are
one. Yet in so far ashe is man, the Father is greater
than he. Since he was God's only Son--not by gracebut by
nature--to the end that he might indeed be the fullness of all grace, he wasalso made Son of Man--and yet he was in the one nature as
well as in the other, oneChrist. "For being in the form
of God, he judged it not a violation to be what he wasby
nature, the equal of God. Yet he emptied himself, taking on the form of aservant,"74 yet neither losing nor diminishing the form of
God.75 Thus he was madeless and remained equal, and both
these in a unity as we said before. But he is oneof
these because he is the Word; the other, because he was a man. As the Word,
heis the equal of the Father; as a man, he is less. He
is the one Son of God, and at thesame time Son of Man;
the one Son of Man, and at the same time God's Son. Theseare not two sons of God, one God and the other man, but one
Son of God--Godwithout origin, man with a definite
origin--our Lord Jesus Christ.

36. In this the grace of God is supremely manifest,
commended in grand andvisible fashion; for what had the
human nature in the man Christ merited, that it,and no
other, should be assumed into the unity of the Person of the only Son of God?What good will, what zealous strivings, what good works
preceded this assumptionby which that particular man
deserved to become one Person with God? Was he a70John
1:14.71Rom. 3:20.72Epistle
CXXXVII, written in 412 in reply to a list of queries sent to Augustine by the
proconsul of Africa.73John 1:1.74Phil. 2:6, 7.75These metaphors for
contrasting the "two natures" of Jesus Christ were favorite figures of speech in
Augustine's Christological thought. Cf. On the Gospel of John, Tractate 78; On
the Trinity, I, 7; II,2; IV, 19-20; VII, 3; New
Testament Sermons, 76, 14.18man
before the union, and was this singular grace given him as to one
particularlydeserving before God? Of course not! For,
from the moment he began to be a man,that man began to
be nothing other than God's Son, the only Son, and this becausethe Word of God assuming him became flesh, yet still
assuredly remained God. Justas every man is a personal
unity--that is, a unity of rational soul and flesh--so alsois Christ a personal unity: Word and man.Why should there be such great glory to a human nature--and
thisundoubtedly an act of grace, no merit preceding
unless it be that those who considersuch a question
faithfully and soberly might have here a clear manifestation ofGod's great and sole grace, and this in order that they
might understand how theythemselves are justified from
their sins by the selfsame grace which made it so thatthe man Christ had no power to sin? Thus indeed the angel
hailed his mother whenannouncing to her the future
birth: "Hail," he said, "full of grace." And shortlythereafter, "You have found favor with God."76 And this was
said of her, that shewas full of grace, since she was to
be mother of her Lord, indeed the Lord of all. Yet,concerning Christ himself, when the Evangelist John said,
"And the Word becameflesh and dwelt among us," he added,
"and we beheld his glory, a glory as of the onlySon of
the Father, full of grace and truth."77 When he said, "The Word was madeflesh," this means, "Full of grace." When he also said, "The
glory of the only begottenof the Father," this means,
"Full of truth." Indeed it was Truth himself, God's onlybegotten Son--and, again, this not by grace but by
nature--who, by grace, assumedhuman nature into such a
personal unity that he himself became the Son of Man aswell.37. This same Jesus Christ,
God's one and only Son our Lord, was born of theHoly
Spirit and the Virgin Mary. Now obviously the Holy Spirit is God's gift, a
giftthat is itself equal to the Giver; wherefore the
Holy Spirit is God also, not inferior tothe Father and
the Son. Now what does this mean, that Christ's birth in respect tohis human nature was of the Holy Spirit, save that this was
itself also a work ofgrace?For
when the Virgin asked of the angel the manner by which what heannounced would come to pass (since she had known no man),
the angel answered:"The Holy Spirit shall come upon you
and the power of the Most High shallovershadow you;
therefore the Holy One which shall be born of you shall be calledthe Son of God."78 And when Joseph wished to put her away,
suspecting adultery(since he knew she was not pregnant
by him), he received a similar answer from theangel: "Do
not fear to take Mary as your wife; for that which is conceived in her is ofthe Holy Spirit"79--that is, "What you suspect is from
another man is of the HolySpirit."

CHAPTER XIITHE ROLE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

38. Are we, then, to say that
the Holy Spirit is the Father of Christ's humannature,
so that as God the Father generated the Word, so the Holy Spirit generatedthe human nature, and that from both natures Christ came to
be one, Son of Godthe Father as the Word, Son of the
Holy Spirit as man? Do we suppose that the HolySpirit is
his Father through begetting him of the Virgin Mary? Who would dare tosay such a thing? There is no need to show by argument how
many absurdconsequences such a notion has, when it is so
absurd in itself that no believer's earcan bear to hear
it. Actually, then, as we confess our Lord Jesus Christ, who is God76Luke 1:28-30.77John 1:14.78Luke 1:35.79Matt. 1:20.19from God yet born as man of the
Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, there is in eachnature
(in both the divine and the human) the only Son of God the Father Almighty,from whom proceeds the Holy Spirit.How, then, do we say that Christ is born of the Holy Spirit,
if the Holy Spiritdid not beget him? Is it because he
made him? This might be, since through ourLord Jesus
Christ--in the form of God--all things were made. Yet in so far as he isman, he himself was made, even as the apostle says: "He was
made of the seed ofDavid according to the flesh."80 But
since that creature which the Virgin conceivedand bore,
though it was related to the Person of the Son alone, was made by thewhole Trinity--for the works of the Trinity are not
separable--why is the Holy Spiritnamed as the One who
made it? Is it, perhaps, that when any One of the Three isnamed in connection with some divine action, the whole
Trinity is to be understoodas involved in that action?
This is true and can be shown by examples, but weshould
not dwell too long on this kind of solution.For what
still concerns us is how it can be said, "Born of the Holy Spirit,"when he is in no wise the Son of the Holy Spirit? Now, just
because God made [fecit]this world, one could not say
that the world is the son of God, or that it is "born" ofGod. Rather, one says it was "made" or "created" or
"founded" or "established" byhim, or however else one
might like to speak of it. So, then, when we confess, "Bornof the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary," the sense in which
he is not the Son of theHoly Spirit and yet is the son
of the Virgin Mary, when he was born both of him andof
her, is difficult to explain. But there is no doubt as to the fact that he was
notborn from him as Father as he was born of her as
mother.39. Consequently we should not grant that
whatever is born of somethingshould therefore be called
the son of that thing. Let us pass over the fact that a sonis "born" of a man in a different sense than a hair is, or a
louse, or a maw worm--none of these is a son. Let us
pass over these things, since they are an unfittinganalogy in so great a matter. Yet it is certain that those
who are born of water andof the Holy Spirit would not
properly be called sons of the water by anyone. But itdoes make sense to call them sons of God the Father and of
Mother Church. Thus,therefore, the one born of the Holy
Spirit is the son of God the Father, not of theHoly
Spirit.What we said about the hair and the other things
has this much relevance,that it reminds us that not
everything which is "born" of something is said to be"son" to him from which it is "born." Likewise, it does not
follow that those who arecalled sons of someone are
always said to have been born of him, since there aresome who are adopted. Even those who are called "sons of
Gehenna" are not born ofit, but have been destined for
it, just as the sons of the Kingdom are destined forthat.40. Wherefore, since a thing
may be "born" of something else, yet not in thefashion
of a "son," and conversely, since not everyone who is called son is born ofhim whose son he is called--this is the very mode in which
Christ was "born" of theHoly Spirit (yet not as a son),
and of the Virgin Mary as a son--this suggests to usthe
grace of God by which a certain human person, no merit whatever preceding, atthe very outset of his existence, was joined to the Word of
God in such a unity ofperson that the selfsame one who
is Son of Man should be Son of God, and the onewho is
Son of God should be Son of Man. Thus, in his assumption of human nature,grace came to be natural to that nature, allowing no power
to sin. This is why graceis signified by the Holy
Spirit, because he himself is so perfectly God that he is alsocalled God's Gift. Still, to speak adequately of this--even
if one could--would call fora very long discussion.80Rom. 1:3.20

CHAPTER XIIIBAPTISM AND ORIGINAL SIN

41. Since he was begotten and conceived in no pleasure of
carnal appetite--and therefore bore no trace of original
sin--he was, by the grace of God (operating ina
marvelous and an ineffable manner), joined and united in a personal unity
withthe only-begotten Word of the Father, a Son not by
grace but by nature. Andalthough he himself committed no
sin, yet because of "the likeness of sinful flesh"81in
which he came, he was himself called sin and was made a sacrifice for thewashing away of sins.Indeed, under
the old law, sacrifices for sins were often called sins.82 Yet heof whom those sacrifices were mere shadows was himself
actually made sin. Thus,when the apostle said, "For
Christ's sake, we beseech you to be reconciled to God,"he straightway added, "Him, who knew no sin, he made to be
sin for us that wemight be made to be the righteousness
of God in him."83 He does not say, as we readin some
defective copies, "He who knew no sin did sin for us," as if Christ himselfcommitted sin for our sake. Rather, he says, "He [Christ]
who knew no sin, he [God]made to be sin for us." The God
to whom we are to be reconciled hath thus madehim the
sacrifice for sin by which we may be reconciled.He
himself is therefore sin as we ourselves are righteousness--not our ownbut God's, not in ourselves but in him. Just as he was
sin--not his own but ours,rooted not in himself but in
us--so he showed forth through the likeness of sinfulflesh, in which he was crucified, that since sin was not in
him he could then, so tosay, die to sin by dying in the
flesh, which was "the likeness of sin." And since hehad
never lived in the old manner of sinning, he might, in his resurrection,
signifythe new life which is ours, which is springing to
life anew from the old death inwhich we had been dead to
sin.42. This is the meaning of the great sacrament of
baptism, which iscelebrated among us. All who attain to
this grace die thereby to sin--as he himself issaid to
have died to sin because he died in the flesh, that is, "in the likeness of
sin"--and they are thereby alive by being reborn in the
baptismal font, just as he roseagain from the sepulcher.
This is the case no matter what the age of the body.43.
For whether it be a newborn infant or a decrepit old man--since no oneshould be barred from baptism--just so, there is no one who
does not die to sin inbaptism. Infants die to original
sin only; adults, to all those sins which they haveadded, through their evil living, to the burden they brought
with them at birth.44. But even these are frequently
said to die to sin, when without doubt theydie not to
one but to many sins, and to all the sins which they have themselvesalready committed by thought, word, and deed. Actually, by
the use of the singularnumber the plural number is often
signified, as the poet said,"And they fill the belly
with the armed warrior,"84although they did this with
many warriors. And in our own Scriptures we read:"Pray
therefore to the Lord that he may take from us the serpent."85 It does not
say"serpents," as it might, for they were suffering from
many serpents. There are,moreover, innumerable other
such examples.Yet, when the original sin is signified by
the use of the plural number, as wesay when infants are
baptized "unto the remission of sins," instead of saying "unto81Rom. 8:3.82Cf. Hos. 4:8.83II Cor. 5:20, 21.84Virgil, Aeneid,
II, 1, 20.85Num. 21:7 (LXX).21the remission of sin," then we
have the converse expression in which the singular isexpressed by the plural number. Thus in the Gospel, it is
said of Herod's death, "Forthey are dead who sought the
child's life"86; it does not say, "He is dead." And inExodus: "They made," [Moses] says, "to themselves gods of
gold," when they hadmade one calf. And of this calf,
they said: "These are thy gods, O Israel, whichbrought
you out of the land of Egypt,"87 here also putting the plural for the
singular.45. Still, even in that one sin--which "entered
into the world by one man andso spread to all men,"88
and on account of which infants are baptized--one canrecognize a plurality of sins, if that single sin is
divided, so to say, into its separateelements. For there
is pride in it, since man preferred to be under his own rulerather than the rule of God; and sacrilege too, for man did
not acknowledge God;and murder, since he cast himself
down to death; and spiritual fornication, for theintegrity of the human mind was corrupted by the seduction
of the serpent; andtheft, since the forbidden fruit was
snatched; and avarice, since he hungered formore than
should have sufficed for him--and whatever other sins that could bediscovered in the diligent analysis of that one sin.46. It is also said--and not without support--that infants
are involved in thesins of their parents, not only of
the first pair, but even of their own, of whom theywere
born. Indeed, that divine judgment, "I shall visit the sins of the fathers ontheir children,"89 definitely applies to them before they
come into the New Covenantby regeneration. This Covenant
was foretold by Ezekiel when he said that the sonsshould
not bear their fathers' sins, nor the proverb any longer apply in Israel,
"Ourfathers have eaten sour grapes and the children's
teeth are set on edge."90This is why each one of them
must be born again, so that he may thereby beabsolved of
whatever sin was in him at the time of birth. For the sins committed byevil-doing after birth can be healed by repentance--as,
indeed, we see it happen evenafter baptism. For the new
birth [regeneratio] would not have been instituted exceptfor the fact that the first birth [generatio] was
tainted--and to such a degree that oneborn of even a
lawful wedlock said, "I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did mymother nourish me in her womb."91 Nor did he say "in
iniquity" or "in sin," as hemight have quite correctly;
rather, he preferred to say "iniquities" and "sins,"because, as I explained above, there are so many sins in
that one sin--which haspassed into all men, and which
was so great that human nature was changed andby it
brought under the necessity of death--and also because there are other sins,such as those of parents, which, even if they cannot change
our nature in the sameway, still involve the children in
guilt, unless the gracious grace and mercy of Godinterpose.47. But, in the matter of
the sins of one's other parents, those who stand asone's
forebears from Adam down to one's own parents, a question might well beraised: whether a man at birth is involved in the evil deeds
of all his forebears, andtheir multiplied original sins,
so that the later in time he is born, the worse estatehe
is born in; or whether, on this very account, God threatens to visit the sins of
theparents as far as--but no farther than--the third and
fourth generations, because inhis mercy he will not
continue his wrath beyond that. It is not his purpose thatthose not given the grace of regeneration be crushed under
too heavy a burden intheir eternal damnation, as they
would be if they were bound to bear, as originalguilt,
all the sins of their ancestors from the beginning of the human race, and topay the due penalty for them. Whether yet another solution
to so difficult a problemmight or might not be found by
a more diligent search and interpretation of HolyScripture, I dare not rashly affirm.86Matt. 2:20.87Ex. 32:4.88Rom. 5:12.89Deut. 5:9.90Ezek. 18:2.91Ps. 51:5.22

48. That one sin, however,
committed in a setting of such great happiness,was
itself so great that by it, in one man, the whole human race was originally
and,so to say, radically condemned. It cannot be
pardoned and washed away exceptthrough "the one mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,"92 whoalone
could be born in such a way as not to need to be reborn.49. They were not reborn, those who were baptized by John's
baptism, bywhich Christ himself was baptized.93 Rather,
they were prepared by the ministry ofthis forerunner,
who said, "Prepare a way for the Lord,"94 for Him in whom alonethey could be reborn.For his baptism
is not with water alone, as John's was, but with the HolySpirit as well. Thus, whoever believes in Christ is reborn
by that same Spirit, ofwhom Christ also was born,
needing not to be reborn. This is the reason for theVoice of the Father spoken over him at his baptism, "Today
have I begotten thee,"95which pointed not to that
particular day on which he was baptized, but to that "day"of changeless eternity, in order to show us that this Man
belonged to the personalUnity of the Only Begotten. For
a day that neither begins with the close ofyesterday nor
ends with the beginning of tomorrow is indeed an eternal "today."Therefore, he chose to be baptized in water by John, not
thereby to washaway any sin of his own, but to manifest
his great humility. Indeed, baptism foundnothing in him
to wash away, just as death found nothing to punish. Hence, it wasin authentic justice, and not by violent power, that the
devil was overcome andconquered: for, as he had most
unjustly slain Him who was in no way deserving ofdeath,
he also did most justly lose those whom he had justly held in bondage aspunishment for their sins. Wherefore, He took upon himself
both baptism anddeath, not out of a piteous necessity
but through his own free act of showing mercy--as part
of a definite plan whereby One might take away the sin of the world, just asone man had brought sin into the world, that is, the whole
human race.50. There is a difference, however. The first
man brought sin into the world,whereas this One took
away not only that one sin but also all the others which hefound added to it. Hence, the apostle says, "And the gift
[of grace] is not like theeffect of the one that sinned:
for the judgment on that one trespass wascondemnation;
but the gift of grace is for many offenses, and brings justification."96Now it is clear that the one sin originally inherited, even
if it were the only oneinvolved, makes men liable to
condemnation. Yet grace justifies a man for manyoffenses, both the sin which he originally inherited in
common with all the othersand also the multitude of sins
which he has committed on his own.51. However, when he
[the apostle] says, shortly after, "Therefore, as theoffense of one man led all men to condemnation, so also the
righteousness of oneman leads all men to the life of
justification,"97 he indicates sufficiently thateveryone
born of Adam is subject to damnation, and no one, unless reborn of Christ,is free from such a damnation.52.
And after this discussion of punishment through one man and gracethrough the Other, as he deemed sufficient for that part of
the epistle, the apostle92I Tim. 2:5.93Matt. 3:13.94Luke 3:4; Isa.
40:3.95Ps. 2:7; Heb. 5:5; cf. Mark 1:9-11.96Rom. 5:16.97Rom. 5:18.23passes on to speak of the great
mystery of holy baptism in the cross of Christ, and todo
this so that we may understand nothing other in the baptism of Christ than
thelikeness of the death of Christ. The death of Christ
crucified is nothing other thanthe likeness of the
forgiveness of sins--so that in the very same sense in which thedeath is real, so also is the forgiveness of our sins real,
and in the same sense inwhich his resurrection is real,
so also in us is there authentic justification.He asks:
"What, then, shall we say? Shall we continue in sin, that grace mayabound?"98--for he had previously said, "But where sin
abounded, grace did muchmore abound."99 And therefore he
himself raised the question whether, because ofthe
abundance of grace that follows sin, one should then continue in sin. But heanswers, "God forbid!" and adds, "How shall we, who are dead
to sin, live any longertherein?"100 Then, to show that
we are dead to sin, "Do you not know that all wewho were
baptized in Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?"101If, therefore, the fact that we are baptized into the death
of Christ shows thatwe are dead to sin, then certainly
infants who are baptized in Christ die to sin, sincethey
are baptized into his own death. For there is no exception in the saying, "All
wewho are baptized into Christ Jesus are baptized into
his death." And the effect ofthis is to show that we are
dead to sin.Yet what sin do infants die to in being
reborn except that which they inheritin being born? What
follows in the epistle also pertains to this: "Therefore we wereburied with him by baptism into death; that, as Christ was
raised up from the deadby the glory of the Father, even
so we also should walk in the newness of life. For ifwe
have been united with him in the likeness of his death, we shall be also
unitedwith him in the likeness of his resurrection,
knowing this, that our old man iscrucified with him,
that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth weshould not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Now if we are dead withChrist, we believe that we shall
also live with him: knowing that Christ, beingraised
from the dead, dies no more; death has no more dominion over him. For thedeath he died, he died to sin, once for all; but the life he
lives, he lives unto God. Soalso, reckon yourselves also
to be dead to sin, but alive unto God through ChristJesus."102Now, he had set out to
prove that we should not go on sinning, in order thatthereby grace might abound, and had said, "If we have died
to sin, how, then, shallwe go on living in it?" And then
to show that we were dead to sin, he had added,"Know you
not, that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptizedinto his death?" Thus he concludes the passage as he began
it. Indeed, he introducedthe death of Christ in order to
say that even he died to sin. To what sin, save that ofthe flesh in which he existed, not as sinner, but in "the
likeness of sin" and whichwas, therefore, called by the
name of sin? Thus, to those baptized into the death ofChrist--into which not only adults but infants as well are
baptized--he says, "So alsoyou should reckon yourselves
to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus."53.
Whatever was done, therefore, in the crucifixion of Christ, his burial, hisresurrection on the third day, his ascension into heaven,
his being seated at theFather's right hand--all these
things were done thus, that they might not onlysignify
their mystical meanings but also serve as a model for the Christian lifewhich we lead here on the earth. Thus, of his crucifixion it
was said, "And they thatare Jesus Christ's have
crucified their own flesh, with the passions and luststhereof"103; and of his burial, "For we are buried with
Christ by baptism into death";of his resurrection,
"Since Christ is raised from the dead through the glory of theFather, so we also should walk with him in newness of life";
of his ascension and98Rom. 6:1.99Rom. 5:20.100Rom. 6:2.101Rom. 6:3.102Rom. 6:4-11.103Gal. 5:24.24session at the Father's right hand: "But if you have risen
again with Christ, seekthe things which are above, where
Christ is sitting at the right hand of God. Setyour
affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For you are dead, andyour life is hid with Christ in God."10454. Now what we believe concerning Christ's future actions,
since we confessthat he will come again from heaven to
judge the living and the dead, does notpertain to this
life of ours as we live it here on earth, because it belongs not to hisdeeds already done, but to what he will do at the close of
the age. To this the apostlerefers and goes on to add,
"When Christ, who is your life, shall appear, you shallthen also appear with him in glory."10555. There are two ways to interpret the affirmation that he
"shall judge theliving and the dead." On the one hand,
we may understand by "the living" those whoare not yet
dead but who will be found living in the flesh when he comes; and wemay understand by "the dead" those who have left the body,
or who shall have left itbefore his coming. Or, on the
other hand, "the living" may signify "the righteous,"and
"the dead" may signify "the unrighteous"--since the righteous are to be
judgedas well as the unrighteous. For sometimes the
judgment of God is passed upon theevil, as in the word,
"But they who have done evil [shall come forth] to theresurrection of judgment."106 And sometimes it is passed
upon the good, as in theword, "Save me, O God, by thy
name, and judge me in thy strength."107 Indeed, it isby
the judgment of God that the distinction between good and evil is made, to
theend that, being freed from evil and not destroyed
with the evildoers, the good maybe set apart at his
right hand.108 This is why the psalmist cried, "Judge me, O God,"and, as if to explain what he had said, "and defend my cause
against an unholynation."109

CHAPTER XVTHE HOLY SPIRIT (56) AND THE CHURCH (57-60)

56. Now, when we have spoken
of Jesus Christ, the only Son of God our Lord,in the
brevity befitting our confession of faith, we go on to affirm that we believealso in the Holy Spirit, as completing the Trinity which is
God; and after that wecall to mind our faith "in holy
Church." By this we are given to understand that therational creation belonging to the free Jerusalem ought to
be mentioned in asubordinate order to the Creator, that
is, the supreme Trinity. For, of course, allthat has
been said about the man Christ Jesus refers to the unity of the Person ofthe Only Begotten.Thus, the right
order of the Creed demanded110 that the Church be madesubordinate to the Trinity, as a house is subordinate to him
who dwells in it, thetemple to God, and the city to its
founder. By the Church here we are to understandthe
whole Church, not just the part that journeys here on earth from rising of
thesun to its setting, praising the name of the Lord111
and singing a new song ofdeliverance from its old
captivity, but also that part which, in heaven, has always,from creation, held fast to God, and which never experienced
the evils of a fall. Thispart, composed of the holy
angels, remains in blessedness, and it gives help, even as104Col. 3:1-3.105Col. 3:4.106John 5:29.107Ps. 54:1.108Cf. Matt. 25:32, 33.109Ps.
43:1.110Reading the classical Latin form poscebat (as in
Scheel and PL) for the late form poxebat (as in Riviere and many old MSS.).111Cf. Ps. 113:3.25it ought, to the other part still on pilgrimage. For both
parts together will make oneeternal consort, as even now
they are one in the bond of love--the whole institutedfor the proper worship of the one God.112 Wherefore, neither
the whole Church norany part of it wishes to be
worshiped as God nor to be God to anyone belonging tothe
temple of God--the temple that is being built up of "the gods" whom theuncreated God created.113 Consequently, if the Holy Spirit
were creature and notCreator, he would obviously be a
rational creature, for this is the highest of thelevels
of creation. But in this case he would not be set in the rule of faith before
theChurch, since he would then belong to the Church, in
that part of it which is inheaven. He would not have a
temple, for he himself would be a temple. Yet, in fact,he hath a temple of which the apostle speaks, "Know you not
that your body is thetemple of the Holy Spirit, who is
in you, whom you have from God?"114 In anotherplace, he
says of this body, "Know you not that your bodies are members ofChrist?"115 How, then, is he not God who has a temple? Or
how can he be less thanChrist whose members are his
temple? It is not that he has one temple and Godanother
temple, since the same apostle says: "Know you not that you are the templeof God," and then, as if to prove his point, added, "and
that the Spirit of Goddwelleth in you?"God therefore dwelleth in his temple, not the Holy Spirit
only, but alsoFather and Son, who saith of his body--in
which he standeth as Head of the Churchon earth "that in
all things he may be pre-eminent"116--"Destroy this temple and inthree days I will raise it up again."117 Therefore, the
temple of God---that is, of thesupreme Trinity as a
whole--is holy Church, the Universal Church in heaven and onthe earth.57. But what can we affirm
about that part of the Church in heaven, savethat in it
no evil is to be found, nor any apostates, nor will there be again, since
thattime when "God did not spare the sinning angels"--as
the apostle Peter writes--"butcasting them out, he
delivered them into the prisons of darkness in hell, to bereserved for the sentence in the Day of Judgment"118?58. Still, how is life ordered in that most blessed and
supernal society? Whatdifferences are there in rank
among the angels, so that while all are called by thegeneral title "angels"--as we read in the Epistle to the
Hebrews, "But to which of theangels said he at any time,
'Sit at my right hand'?"119; this expression clearlysignifies that all are angels without exception--yet there
are archangels there aswell? Again, should these
archangels be called "powers" [virtutes], so that the verse,"Praise him all his angels; praise him, all his powers,"120
would mean the samething as, "Praise him, all his
angels; praise him, all his archangels"? Or, whatdistinctions are implied by the four designations by which
the apostle seems toencompass the entire heavenly
society, "Be they thrones or dominions,principalities,
or powers"121? Let them answer these questions who can, if they canindeed prove their answers. For myself, I confess to
ignorance of such matters. I amnot even certain about
another question: whether the sun and moon and all thestars belong to that same heavenly society--although they
seem to be nothing more112Here reading unum deum (with
Rivière and PL) against deum (in Scheel).113A hyperbolic
expression referring to "the saints." Augustine's Scriptural backing for such an
unusual phrase is Ps. 82:6 and John 10:34f. But note the firm distinction
between ex diis quos facitand non factus Deus.114I Cor. 6:19.115I Cor. 6:15.116Col. 1:18.117John 2:19.118II Peter 2:4 (Old Latin).119Heb.
1:13.120Ps. 148:2 (LXX).121Co1.
1:16.26than luminous bodies,
with neither perception nor understanding.59.
Furthermore, who can explain the kind of bodies in which the angelsappeared to men, so that they were not only visible, but
tangible as well? And,again, how do they, not by impact
of physical stimulus but by spiritual force, bringcertain visions, not to the physical eyes but to the
spiritual eyes of the mind, orspeak something, not to
the ears, as from outside us, but actually from within thehuman soul, since they are present within it too? For, as it
is written in the book ofthe Prophets: "And the angel
that spoke in me, said to me..."122 He does not say,"Spoke to me" but "Spoke in me." How do they appear to men
in sleep, andcommunicate through dreams, as we read in
the Gospel: "Behold, the angel of theLord appeared to
him in his sleep, saying..."123? By these various modes ofpresentation, the angels seem to indicate that they do not
have tangible bodies. Yetthis raises a very difficult
question: How, then, did the patriarchs wash the angels'feet?124 How, also, did Jacob wrestle with the angel in such
a tangible fashion?125To ask such questions as these,
and to guess at the answers as one can, is nota useless
exercise in speculation, so long as the discussion is moderate and oneavoids the mistake of those who think they know what they do
not know.

CHAPTER XVIPROBLEMS ABOUT HEAVENLY AND EARTHLYDIVISIONS OF THE CHURCH

60. It is more important to be able to discern and tell when
Satan transformshimself as an angel of light, lest by
this deception he should seduce us into harmfulacts.
For, when he deceives the corporeal senses, and does not thereby turn themind from that true and right judgment by which one leads
the life of faith, there isno danger to religion. Or if,
feigning himself to be good, he does or says things thatwould fit the character of the good angels, even if then we
believe him good, theerror is neither dangerous nor
fatal to the Christian faith. But when, by these alienwiles, he begins to lead us into his own ways, then great
vigilance is required torecognize him and not follow
after. But how few men are there who are able to avoidhis deadly stratagems, unless God guides and preserves them!
Yet the verydifficulty of this business is useful in
this respect: it shows that no man should resthis hopes
in himself, nor one man in another, but all who are God's should cast theirhopes on him. And that this latter is obviously the best
course for us no pious manwould deny.61. This part of the Church, therefore, which is composed of
the holy angelsand powers of God will become known to us
as it really is only when, at the end ofthe age, we are
joined to it, to possess, together with it, eternal bliss. But the otherpart which, separated from this heavenly company, wanders
through the earth isbetter known to us because we are in
it, and because it is composed of men likeourselves.
This is the part that has been redeemed from all sin by the blood of thesinless Mediator, and its cry is: "If God be for us, who is
against us? He that sparednot his own Son, but delivered
him up for us all...."126 Now Christ did not die for theangels. But still, what was done for man by his death for
man's redemption and hisdeliverance from evil was done
for the angels also, because by it the enmity causedby
sin between men and the angels is removed and friendship restored. Moreover,this redemption of mankind serves to repair the ruins left
by the angelic apostasy.62. Of course, the holy angels,
taught by God--in the eternal contemplation of122Zech.
1:9.123Matt. 1:20.124Gen. 18:4;
19:2.125Gen. 32:24.126Rom. 8:31,
32.27whose truth they are
blessed--know how many of the human race are required to fillup the full census of that commonwealth. This is why the
apostle says "that allthings are restored to unity in
Christ, both those in heaven and those on the earthin
him."127 The part in heaven is indeed restored when the number lost from theangelic apostasy are replaced from the ranks of mankind. The
part on earth isrestored when those men predestined to
eternal life are redeemed from the old stateof
corruption.Thus by the single sacrifice, of which the
many victims of the law were onlyshadows, the heavenly
part is set at peace with the earthly part and the earthlyreconciled to the heavenly. Wherefore, as the same apostle
says: "For it pleased Godthat all plenitude of being
should dwell in him and by him to reconcile all things tohimself, making peace with them by the blood of his cross,
whether those things onearth or those in heaven."12863. This peace, as it is written, "passes all
understanding." It cannot beknown by us until we have
entered into it. For how is the heavenly realm set atpeace, save together with us; that is, by concord with us?
For in that realm there isalways peace, both among the
whole company of rational creatures and betweenthem and
their Creator. This is the peace that, as it is said, "passes allunderstanding." But obviously this means our understanding,
not that of those whoalways see the Father's face. For
no matter how great our understanding may be,"we know in
part, and we see in a glass darkly."129 But when we shall have become"equal to God's angels,"130 then, even as they do, "we shall
see face to face."131 Andwe shall then have as great
amity toward them as they have toward us; for we shallcome to love them as much as we are loved by them.In this way their peace will become known to us, since ours
will be like theirsin kind and measure--nor will it then
surpass our understanding. But the peace ofGod, which is
there, will still doubtless surpass our understanding and theirs aswell. For, of course, in so far as a rational creature is
blessed, this blessednesscomes, not from himself, but
from God. Hence, it follows that it is better to interpretthe passage, "The peace of God which passes all
understanding," so that from theword "all" not even the
understanding of the holy angels should be excepted. OnlyGod's understanding is excepted; for, of course, his peace
does not surpass his ownunderstanding.

CHAPTER XVIIFORGIVENESS OF SINS IN
THE CHURCH

64. The angels
are in concord with us even now, when our sins are forgiven.Therefore, in the order of the Creed, after the reference to
"holy Church" is placedthe reference to "forgiveness of
sins." For it is by this that the part of the Church onearth stands; it is by this that "what was lost and is found
again"132 is not lostagain. Of course, the gift of
baptism is an exception. It is an antidote given usagainst original sin, so that what is contracted by birth is
removed by the new birth--though it also takes away
actual sins as well, whether of heart, word, or deed. Butexcept for this great remission--the beginning point of a
man's renewal, in which allguilt, inherited and
acquired, is washed away--the rest of life, from the age ofaccountability (and no matter how vigorously we progress in
righteousness), is notwithout the need for the
forgiveness of sins. This is the case because the sons of127Cf. Eph. 1:10.128Col. 1:19,
20.129Cf. I Cor. 13:9, 12130Cf.
Luke 20:36.131I Cor. 13:12.132Cf. Luke 15:24.28God, as long as they live this mortal life, are in a
conflict with death. And althoughit is truly said of
them, "As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons ofGod,"133 yet even as they are being led by the Spirit of God
and, as sons of God,advance toward God, they are also
being led by their own spirits so that, weigheddown by
the corruptible body and influenced by certain human feelings, they thusfall away from themselves and commit sin. But it matters how
much. Althoughevery crime is a sin, not every sin is a
crime. Thus we can say of the life of holy meneven while
they live in this mortality, that they are found without crime. "But if wesay that we have no sin," as the great apostle says, "we
deceive even ourselves, andthe truth is not in
us."13465. Nevertheless, no matter how great our crimes,
their forgiveness shouldnever be despaired of in holy
Church for those who truly repent, each according tothe
measure of his sin. And, in the act of repentance,135 where a crime has beencommitted of such gravity as also to cut off the sinner from
the body of Christ, weshould not consider the measure of
time as much as the measure of sorrow. For, "acontrite
and humbled heart God will not despise."136Still, since
the sorrow of one heart is mostly hid from another, and does notcome to notice through words and other such signs--even when
it is plain to Him ofwhom it is said, "My groaning is
not hid from thee"137--times of repentance havebeen
rightly established by those set over the churches, that satisfaction may
alsobe made in the Church, in which the sins are
forgiven. For, of course, outside herthey are not
forgiven. For she alone has received the pledge of the Holy Spirit,138without whom there is no forgiveness of sins. Those forgiven
thus obtain lifeeverlasting.66.
Now the remission of sins has chiefly to do with the future judgment. Inthis life the Scripture saying holds true: "A heavy yoke is
on the sons of Adam, fromthe day they come forth from
their mother's womb till the day of their burial in themother of us all."139 Thus we see even infants, after the
washing of regeneration,tortured by divers evil
afflictions. This helps us to understand that the whole importof the sacraments of salvation has to do more with the hope
of future goods thanwith the retaining or attaining of
present goods.Indeed, many sins seem to be ignored and
go unpunished; but theirpunishment is reserved for the
future. It is not in vain that the day when the Judgeof
the living and the dead shall come is rightly called the Day of Judgment. Just
so,on the other hand, some sins are punished here, and,
if they are forgiven, willcertainly bring no harm upon
us in the future age. Hence, referring to certaintemporal punishments, which are visited upon sinners in this
life, the apostle,speaking to those whose sins are
blotted out and not reserved to the end, says: "Forif we
judge ourselves truly we should not be judged by the Lord. But when we arejudged, we are chastised by the Lord, that we may not be
condemned along with thisworld."140133Rom. 8:14.134I John 1:8.135In actione poenitentiae; cf. Luther's similar conception
of poenitentiam agite in the 95 Theses and in De poenitentia.136Ps. 51:17.137Ps. 38:9.138II Cor. 1:22.139Ecclus. 40:1
(Vulgate).140I Cor. 11:31, 32.29

CHAPTER XVIIIFAITH AND
WORKS

67. There are some,
indeed, who believe that those who do not abandon thename of Christ, and who are baptized in his laver in the
Church, who are not cut offfrom it by schism or heresy,
who may then live in sins however great, not washingthem
away by repentance, nor redeeming them by alms--and who obstinatelypersevere in them to life's last day--even these will still
be saved, "though as byfire." They believe that such
people will be punished by fire, prolonged in proportionto their sins, but still not eternal.But those who believe thus, and still are Catholics, are
deceived, as it seemsto me, by a kind of merely human
benevolence. For the divine Scripture, whenconsulted,
answers differently. Moreover, I have written a book about this question,entitled Faith and Works,142 in which, with God's help, I
have shown as best I couldthat, according to Holy
Scripture, the faith that saves is the faith that the apostlePaul adequately describes when he says, "For in Christ Jesus
neither circumcisionavails anything, nor uncircumcision,
but the faith which works through love."143But if faith
works evil and not good, then without doubt, according to the apostleJames "it is dead in itself."144 He then goes on to say, "If
a man says he has faith,yet has not works, can his faith
be enough to save him?"145Now, if the wicked man were to
be saved by fire on account of his faith only,and if
this is the way the statement of the blessed Paul should be understood--"Buthe himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire"146--then faith
without works would besufficient to salvation. But then
what the apostle James said would be false. Andalso
false would be another statement of the same Paul himself: "Do not err," hesays; "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers,
nor the unmanly, norhomosexuals, nor thieves, nor the
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, norextortioners,
shall inherit the Kingdom of God."147 Now, if those who persist in suchcrimes as these are nevertheless saved by their faith in
Christ, would they not thenbe in the Kingdom of God?68. But, since these fully plain and most pertinent
apostolic testimoniescannot be false, that one obscure
saying about those who build on "the foundation,which is
Christ, not gold, silver, and precious stones, but wood, hay, and
stubble"148--for it is about these it is said that they
will be saved as by fire, not perishing onaccount of the
saving worth of their foundation--such a statement must be141This chapter supplies an important clue to the date of
the Enchiridion and an interesting side light on Augustine's inclination to
re-use "good material." In his treatise on The Eight Questions of Dulcitius (De
octo Dulcitii quaestionibus), 1: 10-13, Augustine quotes this entire chapter as
a part of his answer to the question whether those who sin after baptism are
ever delivered from hell. The date of the De octo is 422 or, possibly, 423; thus
we have a terminus ad quem for the date of the Enchiridion. Still the best text
of De octo is Migne, PL, 40, c. 147-170, and the best English translation is in
Deferrari, St. Augustine: Treatises on Various Subjects (The Fathers of the
Church,New York, 1952), pp. 427-466.142A short treatise, written in 413, in which Augustine
seeks to combine the Pauline and Jacobite emphases by analyzing what kind of
faith and what kind of works are both essential to salvation.The best text is that of Joseph Zycha in CSEL, Vol. 41, pp.
35-97; but see also Migne, PL, 40, c. 197-230. There is
an English translation by C.L. Cornish in A Library of Fathers of the Holy
CatholicChurch; Seventeen Short Treatises, pp. 37-84.143Gal. 5:6.144James 2:17.145James 2:14.146I Cor. 3:15.147I Cor. 6:9, 10.148I Cor. 3:11,
12.30interpreted so that it does
not contradict these fully plain testimonies.In fact,
wood and hay and stubble may be understood, without absurdity, tosignify such an attachment to those worldly things--albeit
legitimate in themselves--that one cannot suffer their
loss without anguish in the soul. Now, when suchanguish
"burns," and Christ still holds his place as foundation in the heart--that
is,if nothing is preferred to him and if the man whose
anguish "burns" would stillprefer to suffer loss of the
things he greatly loves than to lose Christ--then one issaved, "by fire." But if, in time of testing, he should
prefer to hold onto thesetemporal and worldly goods
rather than to Christ, he does not have him asfoundation--because he has put "things" in the first
place--whereas in a buildingnothing comes before the
foundations.Now, this fire, of which the apostle speaks,
should be understood as onethrough which both kinds of
men must pass: that is, the man who builds with gold,silver, and precious stones on this foundation and also the
man who builds withwood, hay, and stubble. For, when he
had spoken of this, he added: "The fire shalltry every
man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abides which he has builtthereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work
burns up, he shall sufferloss; but he himself shall be
saved, yet so as by fire."149 Therefore the fire will testthe work, not only of the one, but of both.The fire is a sort of trial of affliction, concerning which
it is clearly writtenelsewhere: "The furnace tries the
potter's vessels and the trial of affliction testsrighteous men."150 This kind of fire works in the span of
this life, just as the apostlesaid, as it affects the
two different kinds of faithful men. There is, for example, theman who "thinks of the things of God, how he may please
God." Such a man buildson Christ the foundation, with
gold, silver, and precious stones. The other man"thinks
about the things of the world, how he may please his wife"151; that is, hebuilds upon the same foundation with wood, hay, and stubble.
The work of theformer is not burned up, since he has not
loved those things whose loss bringsanguish. But the
work of the latter is burned up, since things are not lost withoutanguish when they have been loved with a possessive love.
But because, in thissecond situation, he prefers to
suffer the loss of these things rather than losingChrist, and does not desert Christ from fear of losing such
things--even though hemay grieve over his loss--"he is
saved," indeed, "yet so as by fire." He "burns" withgrief, for the things he has loved and lost, but this does
not subvert nor consumehim, secured as he is by the
stability and the indestructibility of his foundation.69. It is not incredible that something like this should
occur after this life,whether or not it is a matter for
fruitful inquiry. It may be discovered or remainhidden
whether some of the faithful are sooner or later to be saved by a sort ofpurgatorial fire, in proportion as they have loved the goods
that perish, and inproportion to their attachment to
them. However, this does not apply to those ofwhom it
was said, "They shall not possess the Kingdom of God,"152 unless theircrimes are remitted through due repentance. I say "due
repentance" to signify thatthey must not be barren of
almsgiving, on which divine Scripture lays so muchstress
that our Lord tells us in advance that, on the bare basis of fruitfulness inalms, he will impute merit to those on his right hand; and,
on the same basis ofunfruitfulness, demerit to those on
his left--when he shall say to the former, "Come,blessed
of my Father, receive the Kingdom," but to the latter, "Depart intoeverlasting fire."153149I Cor.
3:11-15.150Ecclus. 27:5.151Cf. I
Cor. 7:32, 33152See above, XVIII, 67.153Matt. 25:34, 41.31

CHAPTER XIXALMSGIVING AND FORGIVENESS

70. We must beware, however, lest anyone suppose that
unspeakable crimessuch as they commit who "will not
possess the Kingdom of God" can be perpetrateddaily and
then daily redeemed by almsgiving. Of course, life must be changed forthe better, and alms should be offered as propitiation to
God for our past sins. Buthe is not somehow to be bought
off, as if we always had a license to commit crimeswith
impunity. For, "he has given no man a license to sin"154--although, in hismercy, he does blot out sins already committed, if due
satisfaction for them is notneglected.71. For the passing and trivial sins of every day, from
which no life is free,the everyday prayer of the
faithful makes satisfaction. For they can say, "OurFather who art in heaven," who have already been reborn to
such a Father "bywater and the Spirit."155 This prayer
completely blots out our minor and everydaysins. It also
blots out those sins which once made the life of the faithful wicked, butfrom which, now that they have changed for the better by
repentance, they havedeparted. The condition of this is
that just as they truly say, "Forgive us our debts"(since there is no lack of debts to be forgiven), so also
they truly say, "As we forgiveour debtors"156; that is,
if what is said is also done. For to forgive a man who seeksforgiveness is indeed to give alms.72. Accordingly, what our Lord says--"Give alms and, behold,
all things areclean to you"157--applies to all useful
acts of mercy. Therefore, not only the man whogives food
to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, clothing to the naked, hospitality tothe wayfarer, refuge to the fugitive; who visits the sick
and the prisoner, redeemsthe captive, bears the burdens
of the weak, leads the blind, comforts the sorrowful,heals the sick, shows the errant the right way, gives advice
to the perplexed, anddoes whatever is needful for the
needy158--not only does this man give alms, but theman
who forgives the trespasser also gives alms as well. He is also a giver of
almswho, by blows or other discipline, corrects and
restrains those under his command,if at the same time he
forgives from the heart the sin by which he has been wrongedor offended, or prays that it be forgiven the offender. Such
a man gives alms, notonly in that he forgives and prays,
but also in that he rebukes and administerscorrective
punishment, since in this he shows mercy.Now, many
benefits are bestowed on the unwilling, when their interests andnot their preferences are consulted. And men frequently are
found to be their ownenemies, while those they suppose
to be their enemies are their true friends. Andthen, by
mistake, they return evil for good, when a Christian ought not to returnevil even for evil. Thus, there are many kinds of alms, by
which, when we do them,we are helped in obtaining
forgiveness of our own sins.73. But none of these alms
is greater than the forgiveness from the heart of asin
committed against us by someone else. It is a smaller thing to wish well or
evento do well to one who has done you no evil. It is
far greater--a sort of magnificentgoodness--to love your
enemy, and always to wish him well and, as you can, do wellto him who wishes you ill and who does you harm when he can.
Thus one heedsGod's command: "Love your enemies, do good
to them that hate you, and pray forthem that persecute
you."159154Ecclus. 15:20.155John
3:5.156Matt. 6:9-12.157Cf. Luke
11 :41.158This is a close approximation of the medieval
lists of "The Seven Works of Mercy." Cf. J.T.McNeill, A
History of the Cure of Souls, pp. 155, 161. (Harper & Brothers, 1951, New
York.)159Matt. 5:44.32Such counsels are for the perfect sons of God. And although
all the faithfulshould strive toward them and through
prayer to God and earnest endeavor bringtheir souls up
to this level, still so high a degree of goodness is not possible for sogreat a multitude as we believe are heard when, in prayer,
they say, "Forgive us ourdebts, as we forgive our
debtors." Accordingly, it cannot be doubted that the terms ofthis pledge are fulfilled if a man, not yet so perfect that
he already loves hisenemies, still forgives from the
heart one who has sinned against him and who nowasks his
forgiveness. For he surely seeks forgiveness when he asks for it when heprays, saying, "As we forgive our debtors." For this means,
"Forgive us our debtswhen we ask for forgiveness, as we
also forgive our debtors when they ask forforgiveness."74. Again, if one seeks
forgiveness from a man against whom he sinned--moved by
his sin to seek it--he should no longer be regarded as an enemy, and itshould not now be as difficult to love him as it was when he
was actively hostile.Now, a man who does not forgive
from the heart one who asks forgivenessand is repentant
of his sins can in no way suppose that his own sins are forgiven bythe Lord, since the Truth cannot lie, and what hearer and
reader of the gospel hasnot noted who it was who said,
"I am the Truth"160? It is, of course, the One who,when
he was teaching the prayer, strongly emphasized this sentence which he putin it, saying: "For if you forgive men their trespasses,
your Heavenly Father willalso forgive you your
trespasses. But if you will not forgive men, neither will yourFather forgive you your offenses."161 He who is not awakened
by such greatthundering is not asleep, but dead. And yet
such a word has power to awaken eventhe dead.

CHAPTER XXSPIRITUAL ALMSGIVING

75. Now, surely, those who live in gross wickedness and take
no care tocorrect their lives and habits, who yet, amid
their crimes and misdeeds, continue tomultiply their
alms, flatter themselves in vain with the Lord's words, "Give alms;and, behold, all things are clean to you." They do not
understand how far this sayingreaches. In order for them
to understand, let them notice to whom it was that hesaid it. For this is the context of it in the Gospel: "As he
was speaking, a certainPharisee asked him to dine with
him. And he went in and reclined at the table. Andthe
Pharisee began to wonder and ask himself why He had not washed himselfbefore dinner. But the Lord said to him: 'Now you Pharisees
clean the outside of thecup and the dish, but within you
are still full of extortion and wickedness. Foolishones!
Did not He who made the outside make the inside too? Nevertheless, give foralms what remains within; and, behold, all things are clean
to you.'"162 Should weinterpret this to mean that to the
Pharisees, who had not the faith of Christ, allthings
are clean if only they give alms, as they deem it right to give them, even ifthey have not believed in him, nor been reborn of water and
the Spirit? But all areunclean who are not made clean by
the faith of Christ, of whom it is written,"Cleansing
their hearts by faith."163 And as the apostle said, "But to them that areunclean and unbelieving nothing is clean; both their minds
and consciences areunclean."164 How, then, should all
things be clean to the Pharisees, even if theygave alms,
but were not believers? Or, how could they be believers, if they wereunwilling to believe in Christ and to be born again in his
grace? And yet, what they160John 14:6.161Matt. 6:14, 15.162Luke
11:37-41.163Acts 15:9.164Titus
1:15.33heard is true: "Give
alms; and behold, all things are clean to you."76. He
who would give alms as a set plan of his life should begin with himselfand give them to himself. For almsgiving is a work of mercy,
and the saying is mosttrue: "Have mercy upon your own
soul, pleasing God."165 The purpose of the newbirth is
that we should become pleasing to God, who is justly displeased with the sinwe contracted in birth. This is the first almsgiving, which
we give to ourselves--when through the mercy of a
merciful God we come to inquire about ourwretchedness
and come to acknowledge the just verdict by which we were put inneed of that mercy, of which the apostle says, "Judgment
came by that one trespassto condemnation."166 And the
same herald of grace then adds (in a word ofthanksgiving
for God's great love), "But God commendeth his love toward us in that,while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."167 Thus,
when we come to a validestimate of our wretchedness and
begin to love God with the love he himself givethus, we
then begin to live piously and righteously.But the
Pharisees, while they gave as alms a tithing of even the least of theirfruits, disregarded this "judgment and love of God."
Therefore, they did not begintheir almsgiving with
themselves, nor did they, first of all, show mercy towardthemselves. In reference to this right order of self-love,
it was said, "You shall loveyour neighbor as
yourself."168Therefore, when the Lord had reproved the
Pharisees for washing themselveson the outside while
inwardly they were still full of extortion and wickedness, hethen admonished them also to give those alms which a man
owes first to himself--tomake clean the inner man:
"However," he said, "give what remains as alms, and,behold, all things are clean to you." Then, to make plain
the import of hisadmonition, which they had ignored, and
to show them that he was not ignorant oftheir kind of
almsgiving, he adds, "But woe to you, Pharisees"169--as if to say, "I amadvising you to give the kind of alms which shall make all
things clean to you." "Butwoe to you, for you tithe mint
and rue and every herb"--"I know these alms of yoursand
you need not think I am admonishing you to give them up"--"and then neglectjustice and the love of God." "This kind of almsgiving would
make you clean from allinward defilement, just as the
bodies which you wash are made clean by you." Forthe
word "all" here means both "inward" and "outward"--as elsewhere we read,"Make clean the inside, and the outside will become
clean."170But, lest it appear that he was rejecting the
kind of alms we give of theearth's bounty, he adds,
"These things you should do"--that is, pay heed to thejudgment and love of God--and "not omit the others"--that
is, alms done with theearth's bounty.77. Therefore, let them not deceive themselves who suppose
that by givingalms--however profusely, and whether of
their fruits or money or anything else--they purchase
impunity to continue in the enormity of their crimes and thegrossness of their wickedness. For not only do they do such
things, but they alsolove them so much that they would
always choose to continue in them--if they coulddo so
with impunity. "But he who loves iniquity hates his own soul."171 And he whohates his own soul is not merciful but cruel to it. For by
loving it after the world'sway he hates it according to
God's way of judging. Therefore, if one really wished togive alms to himself, that all things might become clean to
him, he would hate hissoul after the world's way and
love it according to God's way. No one, however, givesany alms at all unless he gives from the store of Him who
needs not anything.165Ecclus. 30:24 (Vulgate).166Rom. 5:16.167Rom. 5:8.168Luke 10:27.169Luke 11:42.170Matt. 23:26.171Ps. 10:6
(Vulgate).34"Accordingly," it is
said, "His mercy shall go before me."172

CHAPTER XXIPROBLEMS OF
CASUISTRY

78. What sins
are trivial and what are grave, however, is not for human butfor divine judgment to determine. For we see that, in
respect of some sins, even theapostle, by pardoning
them, has conceded this point. Such a case is seen in what thevenerable Paul says to married folks: "Do not deprive one
another, except byconsent for a time to give yourselves
to prayer, and then return together lest Satantempt you
at the point of self-control."173 One could consider that it is not a sin for
amarried couple to have intercourse, not only for the
sake of procreating children--which is the good of
marriage--but also for the sake of the carnal pleasure involved.Thus, those whose self-control is weak could avoid
fornication, or adultery, andother kinds of impurity too
shameful to name, into which their lust might drag themthrough Satan's tempting. Therefore one could, as I said,
consider this not a sin, hadthe apostle not added, "But
I say this as a concession, not as a rule." Who, then,denies that it is a sin when he agrees that apostolic
authority for doing it is givenonly by "concession"?Another such case is seen where he says, "Dare any of you,
having a caseagainst another, bring it to be judged
before the unrighteous and not the saints?"174And a bit
later: "If, therefore, you have cases concerning worldly things," he says,"you appoint those who are contemptible in the Church's
eyes. I say this to shameyou. Can it be that there is
not a wise man among you, who could judge between hisbrethren? But brother goes to law with brother, and that in
the presence ofunbelievers."175 And here it might be
thought that it was not a sin to bring suitagainst a
brother, and that the only sin consisted in wishing it judged outside theChurch, if the apostle had not added immediately, "Now
therefore the whole faultamong you is that you have
lawsuits with one another."176 Then, lest someoneexcuse
himself on this point by saying that he had a just cause and was sufferinginjustice which he wished removed by judicial sentence, the
apostle directly resistssuch thoughts and excuses by
saying: "Why not rather suffer iniquity? Why notrather
be defrauded?"177 Thus we are brought back to that saying of the Lord: "Ifanyone would take your tunic and contend in court with you,
let go your cloakalso."178 And in another place: "If a
man takes away your goods, seek them notback."179 Thus,
he forbids his own to go to court with other men in secular suits.And it is because of this teaching that the apostle says
that this kind of action is "afault." Still, when he
allows such suits to be decided in the Church, brothers judgingbrothers, yet sternly forbids such a thing outside the
Church, it is clear that someconcession is being made
here for the infirmities of the weak.Because of these
and similar sins--and of others even less than these, such asoffenses in words and thoughts--and because, as the apostle
James confesses, "weall offend in many things,"180 it
behooves us to pray to the Lord daily and often, andsay,
"Forgive us our debts," and not lie about what follows this petition, "As we
alsoforgive our debtors."172Ps.
58:11 (Vulgate); cf. Ps. 59:10 (R.S.V.).173I Cor. 7:5
(mixed text).174I Cor. 6:1.175I
Cor. 6:4-6.176I Cor. 6:7a.177I
Cor. 6:7b.178Matt. 5:40.179Luke
6:30.180James 3:2 (Vulgate).3579. There are, however, some sins
that could be deemed quite trifling if theScriptures did
not show that they are more serious than we think. For who wouldsuppose that one saying to his brother, "You fool," is "in
danger of hell-fire," if theTruth had not said it?
Still, for the hurt he immediately supplied a medicine, addingthe precept of brotherly reconciliation: "If, therefore, you
are offering a gift at thealtar, and remember there that
your brother has something against you,"181 etc.Or who
would think how great a sin it is to observe days and months andyears and seasons--as those people do who will or will not
begin projects on certaindays or in certain months or
years, because they follow vain human doctrines andsuppose that various seasons are lucky or unlucky--if we did
not infer themagnitude of this evil from the apostle's
fear, in saying to such men, "I fear for you,lest
perhaps I have labored among you in vain"182?80. To this
one might add those sins, however grave and terrible, which,when they come to be habitual, are then believed to be
trivial or no sins at all. Andso far does this go that
such sins are not only not kept secret, but are evenproclaimed and published abroad--cases of which it is
written, "The sinner ispraised in the desires of his
soul; and he that works iniquity is blessed."183In the
divine books such iniquity is called a "cry" (clamor). You have such ausage in the prophet Isaiah's reference to the evil
vineyard: "I looked that he shouldperform justice, yet
he did iniquity; not justice but a cry."184 So also is that passagein Genesis: "The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is
multiplied,"185 for among thesepeople such crimes were
not only unpunished, but were openly committed, as ifsanctioned by law.So also in our
times so many evils, even if not like those [of old], have come tobe public customs that we not only do not dare excommunicate
a layman; we do notdare degrade a clergyman for them.
Thus, several years ago, when I wasexpounding the
Epistle to the Galatians, where the apostle says, "I fear for you, lestperchance I have labored in vain among you," I was moved to
exclaim: "Woe to thesins of men! We shrink from them
only when we are not accustomed to them. As forthose
sins to which we are accustomed--although the blood of the Son of God wasshed to wash them away--although they are so great that the
Kingdom of God iswholly closed to them, yet, living with
them often we come to tolerate them, and,tolerating
them, we even practice some of them! But grant, O Lord, that we do notpractice any of them which we could prohibit!" I shall
someday know whetherimmoderate indignation moved me here
to speak rashly.

CHAPTER XXIITHE TWO
CAUSES OF SIN

81. I shall
now mention what I have often discussed before in other places inmy short treatises.186 We sin from two causes: either from
not seeing what we oughtto do, or else from not doing
what we have already seen we ought to do. Of thesetwo,
the first is ignorance of the evil; the second, weakness.We must surely fight against both; but we shall as surely be
defeated unlesswe are divinely helped, not only to see
what we ought to do, but also, as soundjudgment
increases, to make our love of righteousness victor over our love of those181Matt. 5:22, 23.182Gal. 4:11
(Vulgate).183Ps. 10:3 (Vulgate).184Isa. 5:7 (LXX).185Gen. 18:20
(Vulgate with one change).186For example, Contra Faust.,
XXII, 78; De pecc. meritis et remissione, I, xxxix, 70; ibid., II, xxii, 26;
Quaest. in Heptateuch, 4:24; De libero arbitrio, 3:18, 55; De div. quaest.,
83:26; De natura et gratia, 67:81; Contra duas ep. Pelag., I:3, 7; I:13:27.36things because of which--either by
desiring to possess them or by fearing to losethem--we
fall, open-eyed, into known sin. In this latter case, we are not onlysinners--which we are even when we sin through
ignorance--but also lawbreakers:for we do not do what we
should, and we do what we know already we should not.Accordingly, we should pray for pardon if we have sinned, as
we do when wesay, "Forgive us our debts as we also
forgive our debtors." But we should also praythat God
should guide us away from sin, and this we do when we say, "Lead us notinto temptation"--and we should make our petitions to Him of
whom it is said in thepsalm, "The Lord is my light and
my salvation"187; that, as Light, he may take awayour
ignorance, as Salvation, our weakness.82. Now, penance
itself is often omitted because of weakness, even when inChurch custom there is an adequate reason why it should be
performed. For shameis the fear of displeasing men, when
a man loves their good opinion more than heregards
judgment, which would make him humble himself in penitence. Wherefore,not only for one to repent, but also in order that he may be
enabled to do so, themercy of God is prerequisite.
Otherwise, the apostle would not say of some men, "Incase God giveth them repentance."188 And, similarly, that
Peter might be enabled toweep bitterly, the Evangelist
tells, "The Lord looked at him."18983. But the man who
does not believe that sins are forgiven in the Church,who despises so great a bounty of the divine gifts and ends,
and persists to his lastday in such an obstinacy of
mind--that man is guilty of the unpardonable sinagainst
the Holy Spirit, in whom Christ forgiveth sins.190 I have discussed thisdifficult question, as clearly as I could, in a little book
devoted exclusively to thisvery point.191

CHAPTER XXIIITHE REALITY OF THE RESURRECTION

84. Now, with respect to the
resurrection of the body--and by this I do notmean the
cases of resuscitation after which people died again, but a resurrection toeternal life after the fashion of Christ's own body--I have
not found a way to discussit briefly and still give
satisfactory answers to all the questions usually raised aboutit. Yet no Christian should have the slightest doubt as to
the fact that the bodies ofall men, whether already or
yet to be born, whether dead or still to die, will beresurrected.85. Once this fact is
established, then, first of all, comes the question aboutabortive fetuses, which are indeed "born" in the mother's
womb, but are never sothat they could be "reborn." For,
if we say that there is a resurrection for them, thenwe
can agree that at least as much is true of fetuses that are fully formed. But,
withregard to undeveloped fetuses, who would not more
readily think that they perish,like seeds that did not
germinate?192But who, then, would dare to deny--though
he would not dare to affirm iteither--that in the
resurrection day what is lacking in the forms of things will befilled out? Thus, the perfection which time would have
accomplished will not belacking, any more than the
blemishes wrought by time will still be present. Nature,then, will be cheated of nothing apt and fitting which
time's passage would have187Ps. 27:1.188II Tim. 2:25 (mixed text).189Cf.
Luke 22:61.190Cf. John 20:22, 23.191This libellus is included in Augustine's Sermons (LXXI,
PL, 38, col. 445-467), to which Possidius, gave the title De blasphemia in
Spiritum Sanctum. English translation in N-PNF, 1st Series, Vol. VI, Sermon XXI,
pp. 318-332.192Sicut semina quae concepta non
fuerint.37brought, nor will
anything remain disfigured by anything adverse and contrarywhich time has wrought. But what is not yet a whole will
become whole, just aswhat has been disfigured will be
restored to its full figure.86. On this score, a
corollary question may be most carefully discussed by themost learned men, and still I do not know that any man can
answer it, namely:When does a human being begin to live
in the womb? Is there some form of hiddenlife, not yet
apparent in the motions of a living thing? To deny, for example, thatthose fetuses ever lived at all which are cut away limb by
limb and cast out of thewombs of pregnant women, lest
the mothers die also if the fetuses were left theredead,
would seem much too rash. But, in any case, once a man begins to live, it isthereafter possible for him to die. And, once dead,
wheresoever death overtook him,I cannot find the basis
on which he would not have a share in the resurrection of thedead.87. By the same token, the
resurrection is not to be denied in the cases ofmonsters
which are born and live, even if they quickly die, nor should we believethat they will be raised as they were, but rather in an
amended nature and freefrom faults. Far be it from us to
say of that double-limbed man recently born in theOrient--about whom most reliable brethren have given
eyewitness reports and thepresbyter Jerome, of holy
memory, has left a written account193--far be it from us, Isay, to suppose that at the resurrection there will be one
double man, and not rathertwo men, as there would have
been if they had actually been born twins. So also inother cases, which, because of some excess or defect or
gross deformity, are calledmonsters: at the resurrection
they will be restored to the normal humanphysiognomy, so
that every soul will have its own body and not two bodies joinedtogether, even though they were born this way. Every soul
will have, as its own, allthat is required to complete a
whole human body.88. Moreover, with God, the earthly
substance from which the flesh of mortalman is produced
does not perish. Instead, whether it be dissolved into dust or ashes,or dispersed into vapors and the winds, or converted into
the substance of otherbodies (or even back into the
basic elements themselves), or has served as food forbeasts or even men and been turned into their flesh--in an
instant of time thismatter returns to the soul that
first animated it, and that caused it to become aman, to
live and to grow.89. This earthly matter which becomes a
corpse upon the soul's departurewill not, at the
resurrection, be so restored that the parts into which it wasseparated and which have become parts of other things must
necessarily return tothe same parts of the body in which
they were situated--though they do return tothe body
from which they were separated. Otherwise, to suppose that the hairrecovers what frequent clippings have taken off, or the
nails get back whattrimming has pared off, makes for a
wild and wholly unbecoming image in theminds of those
who speculate this way and leads them thus to disbelieve in theresurrection. But take the example of a statue made of
fusible metal: if it weremelted by heat or pounded into
dust, or reduced to a shapeless mass, and an artistwished to restore it again from the mass of the same
material, it would make nodifference to the wholeness of
the restored statue which part of it was remade ofwhat
part of the metal, so long as the statue, as restored, had been given all thematerial of which it was originally composed. Just so,
God--an artist who works inmarvelous and mysterious
ways--will restore our bodies, with marvelous andmysterious celerity, out of the whole of the matter of which
it was originallycomposed. And it will make no
difference, in the restoration, whether hair returnsto
hair and nails to nails, or whether the part of this original matter that hadperished is turned back into flesh and restored to other
parts of the body. The mainthing is that the providence
of the [divine] Artist takes care that nothingunbecoming
will result.193Jerome, Epistle to Vitalis, Ep. LXXII, 2;
PL, 22, 674. Augustine also refers to similar phenomena in The City of God, XVI.
viii, 2.3890. Nor does it follow
that the stature of each person will be different whenbrought to life anew because there were differences in
stature when first alive, northat the lean will be
raised lean or the fat come back to life in their former obesity.But if this is in the Creator's plan, that each shall retain
his special features andthe proper and recognizable
likeness of his former self--while an equality of physicalendowment will be preserved--then the matter of which each
resurrection body iscomposed will be so disposed that
none shall be lost, and any defect will be suppliedby
Him who can create out of nothing as he wills.But if in
the bodies of those rising again there is to be an intelligibleinequality, such as between voices that fill out a chorus,
this will be managed bydisposing the matter of each body
so to bring men into their place in the angelicband and
impose nothing on their senses that is inharmonious. For surely nothingunseemly will be there, and whatever is there will be
fitting, and this because theunfitting will simply not
be.91. The bodies of the saints, then, shall rise again
free from blemish anddeformity, just as they will be
also free from corruption, encumbrance, or handicap.Their facility [facilitas] will be as complete as their
felicity [felicitas]. This is whytheir bodies are called
"spiritual," though undoubtedly they will be bodies and notspirits. For just as now the body is called "animate"
[animale], though it is a bodyand not a "spirit"
[anima], so then it will be a "spiritual body," but still a body andnot a spirit.Accordingly, then, as
far as the corruption which weighs down the soul andthe
vices through which "the flesh lusts against the spirit"194 are concerned,
therewill be no "flesh," but only body, since there are
bodies that are called "heavenlybodies."195 This is why
it is said, "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the Kingdom ofGod," and then, as if to expound what was said, it adds,
"Neither shall corruptioninherit incorruption."196 What
the writer first called "flesh and blood" he later called"corruption," and what he first called "the Kingdom of God"
he then later called"incorruption."But, as far as the substance of the resurrection body is
concerned, it will eventhen still be "flesh." This is
why the body of Christ is called "flesh" even after theresurrection. Wherefore the apostle also says, "What is sown
a natural body [corpusanimale] rises as a spiritual body
[corpus spirituale]."197 For there will then be sucha
concord between flesh and spirit--the spirit quickening the servant flesh
withoutany need of sustenance therefrom--that there will
be no further conflict withinourselves. And just as
there will be no more external enemies to bear with, soneither shall we have to bear with ourselves as enemies
within.92. But whoever are not liberated from that mass
of perdition (brought topass through the first man) by
the one Mediator between God and man, they willalso rise
again, each in his own flesh, but only that they may be punished togetherwith the devil and his angels. Whether these men will rise
again with all theirfaults and deformities, with their
diseased and deformed members--is there anyreason for us
to labor such a question? For obviously the uncertainty about theirbodily form and beauty need not weary us, since their
damnation is certain andeternal. And let us not be moved
to inquire how their body can be incorruptible if itcan
suffer--or corruptible if it cannot die. For there is no true life unless it be
livedin happiness; no true incorruptibility save where
health is unscathed by pain. Butwhere an unhappy being
is not allowed to die, then death itself, so to say, dies not;and where pain perpetually afflicts but never destroys,
corruption goes on endlessly.This state is called, in
the Scripture, "the second death."19893. Yet neither the
first death, in which the soul is compelled to leave its194Gal. 5:17.195I Cor. 15:40.196I Cor. 15:50.197I Cor. 15:44.198Rev. 2:11; 20:6, 14.39body, nor the second death, in which it is not allowed to
leave the body undergoingpunishment, would have befallen
man if no one had sinned. Surely, the lightest ofall
punishments will be laid on those who have added no further sin to thatoriginally contracted. Among the rest, who have added
further Sins to that one, theywill suffer a damnation
somewhat more tolerable in proportion to the lesser degreeof their iniquity.

CHAPTER XXIVTHE
SOLUTION TO PRESENT SPIRITUAL ENIGMAS TO BEAWAITED IN
THE LIFE OF THE WORLD TO COME

94. And thus it will be that while the reprobated angels and
men go on intheir eternal punishment, the saints will go
on learning more fully the blessingswhich grace has
bestowed upon them. Then, through the actual realities of theirexperience, they will see more clearly the meaning of what
is written in The Psalms:"I will sing to thee of mercy
and judgment, O Lord"199--since no one is set free saveby unmerited mercy and no one is damned save by a merited
condemnation.95. Then what is now hidden will not be
hidden: when one of two infants istaken up by God's
mercy and the other abandoned through God's judgment--andwhen the chosen one knows what would have been his just
deserts in judgment--why was the one chosen rather than
the other, when the condition of the two wasthe same? Or
again, why were miracles not wrought in the presence of certainpeople who would have repented in the face of miraculous
works, while miracleswere wrought in the presence of
those who were not about to believe. For our Lordsaith
most plainly: "Woe to you, Chorazin; woe to you, Bethsaida. For if in Tyre
andSidon had been wrought the miracles done in your
midst, they would have repentedlong ago in sackcloth and
ashes."200 Now, obviously, God did not act unjustly in notwilling their salvation, even though they could have been
saved, if he willed it so.201Then, in the clearest light
of wisdom, will be seen what now the pious hold byfaith,
not yet grasping it in clear understanding--how certain, immutable, andeffectual is the will of God, how there are things he can do
but doth not will to do,yet willeth nothing he cannot
do, and how true is what is sung in the psalm: "Butour
God is above in heaven; in heaven and on earth he hath done all thingswhatsoever that he would."202 This obviously is not true, if
there is anything that hewilled to do and did not do,
or, what were worse, if he did not do something because199Ps. 100:1 (Vulgate); cf. Ps. 101:1 (R.S.V.).200Matt. 11:21.201This is one of the
rare instances in which a textual variant in Augustine's text affects a basic
issue in the interpretation of his doctrine. All but one of the major old
editions, up to and including Migne, here read: Nec utique deus injuste noluit
salvos fiere eum possent salvi esse SI VELLENT (if they willed it). This would
mean the attribution of a decisive role in human salvation to the humanwill and would thus stand out in bold relief from his
general stress in the rest of the Enchiridion and elsewhere on the primacy and
even irresistibility of grace. The Jansenist edition of Augustine, by Arnauld in
1648, read SI VELLET (if He willed it) and the reading became the subject of
acrimonious controversy between the Jansenists and the Molinists. The Maurist
edition reads si vellet, on thestrength of much
additional MS. evidence that had not been available up to that time. In modern
times, the si vellet reading has come to have the overwhelming support of the
critical editors, although Rivière still reads si vellent. Cf. Scheel, 76-77
(See Bibl.); Rivière, 402-403; J.=G. Krabinger,S.
Aurelii Augustini Enchiridion (Tübingen, 1861 ), p. 116; Faure-Passaglia, S.
Aurelii AugustiniEnchiridion (Naples, 1847), p. 178; and
H. Hurter, Sanctorum Patrum opuscula selecta (Innsbruck,1895), p. 123.202Cf. Ps. 113:11 (a
mixed text; composed inexactly from Ps. 115:3 and Ps. 135:6; an interesting
instance of Augustine's sense of liberty with the texts of Scripture. Here he is
doubtless quoting from memory).40man's will prevented him, the Omnipotent, from doing what he
willed. Nothing,therefore, happens unless the Omnipotent
wills it to happen. He either allows it tohappen or he
actually causes it to happen.96. Nor should we doubt
that God doth well, even when he alloweth whateverhappens ill to happen. For he alloweth it only through a
just judgment--and surelyall that is just is good.
Therefore, although evil, in so far as it is evil, is not good,still it is a good thing that not only good things exist but
evil as well. For if it werenot good that evil things
exist, they would certainly not be allowed to exist by theOmnipotent Good, for whom it is undoubtedly as easy not to
allow to exist what hedoes not will, as it is for him to
do what he does will.Unless we believe this, the very
beginning of our Confession of Faith isimperiled--the
sentence in which we profess to believe in God the Father Almighty.For he is called Almighty for no other reason than that he
can do whatsoever hewilleth and because the efficacy of
his omnipotent will is not impeded by the will ofany
creature.97. Accordingly, we must now inquire about the
meaning of what was saidmost truly by the apostle
concerning God, "Who willeth that all men should besaved."203 For since not all--not even a majority--are
saved, it would indeed appearthat the fact that what God
willeth to happen does not happen is due to an embargoon
God's will by the human will.Now, when we ask for the
reason why not all are saved, the customaryanswer is:
"Because they themselves have not willed it." But this cannot be said ofinfants, who have not yet come to the power of willing or
not willing. For, if we couldattribute to their wills
the infant squirmings they make at baptism, when theyresist as hard as they can, we would then have to say that
they were saved againsttheir will. But the Lord's
language is clearer when, in the Gospel, he reproveth theunrighteous city: "How often," he saith, "would I have
gathered your childrentogether, as a hen gathers her
chicks, and you would not."204 This sounds as if God'swill had been overcome by human wills and as if the weakest,
by not willing,impeded the Most Powerful so that he
could not do what he willed. And where isthat
omnipotence by which "whatsoever he willed in heaven and on earth, he hasdone," if he willed to gather the children of Jerusalem
together, and did not do so?Or, is it not rather the
case that, although Jerusalem did not will that her childrenbe gathered together by him, yet, despite her unwillingness,
God did indeed gathertogether those children of hers
whom he would? It is not that "in heaven and onearth" he
hath willed and done some things, and willed other things and not donethem. Instead, "all things whatsoever he willed, he hath
done."

CHAPTER XXVPREDESTINATION AND THE JUSTICE OF GOD

98. Furthermore, who would be so
impiously foolish as to say that God cannotturn the evil
wills of men--as he willeth, when he willeth, and where he willeth--toward the good? But, when he acteth, he acteth through
mercy; when he doth notact, it is through justice. For,
"he hath mercy on whom he willeth; and whom hewilleth,
he hardeneth."205Now when the apostle said this, he was
commending grace, of which he hadjust spoken in
connection with the twin children in Rebecca's womb: "Before theyhad yet been born, or had done anything good or bad, in
order that the electingpurpose of God might
continue--not through works but through the divine calling--it203I Tim. 2:4.204Matt. 23:37.205Rom. 9:18.41was said of them, 'The elder shall serve the younger.' "206
Accordingly, he refers toanother prophetic witness,
where it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau have Ihated."207 Then, realizing how what he said could disturb
those whoseunderstanding could not penetrate to this
depth of grace, he adds: "What thereforeshall we say to
this? Is there unrighteousness in God? God forbid!"208 Yet it doesseem unfair that, without any merit derived from good works
or bad, God shouldlove the one and hate the other. Now,
if the apostle had wished us to understandthat there
were future good deeds of the one, and evil deeds of the other--which God,of course, foreknew--he would never have said "not of good
works" but rather "offuture works." Thus he would have
solved the difficulty; or, rather, he would haveleft no
difficulty to be solved. As it is, however, when he went on to exclaim, "Godforbid!"--that is, "God forbid that there should be
unfairness in God"--he proceedsimmediately to add (to
prove that no unfairness in God is involved here), "For hesays to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,
and I will show pity towhom I will show pity.'"209 Now,
who but a fool would think God unfair either whenhe
imposes penal judgment on the deserving or when he shows mercy to theundeserving? Finally, the apostle concludes and says,
"Therefore, it is not a questionof him who wills nor of
him who runs but of God's showing mercy."210Thus, both
the twins were "by nature children of wrath,"211 not because ofany works of their own, but because they were both bound in
the fetters ofdamnation originally forged by Adam. But
He who said, "I will have mercy on whomI will have
mercy," loved Jacob in unmerited mercy, yet hated Esau with meritedjustice. Since this judgment [of wrath] was due them both,
the former learned fromwhat happened to the other that
the fact that he had not, with equal merit, incurredthe
same penalty gave him no ground to boast of his own distinctive merits--but,instead, that he should glory in the abundance of divine
grace, because "it is not aquestion of him who wills nor
of him who runs, but of God's showing mercy."212 And,indeed, the whole visage of Scripture and, if I may speak
so, the lineaments of itscountenance, are found to
exhibit a mystery, most profound and salutary, toadmonish all who carefully look thereupon "that he who
glories, should glory in theLord."21399. Now, after the apostle had commended God's mercy in
saying, "So then,there is no question of him who wills
nor of him who runs, but of God's showingmercy," next in
order he intends to speak also of his judgment--for where his mercyis not shown, it is not unfairness but justice. For with God
there is no injustice.Thus, he immediately added, "For
the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'For this verypurpose I
raised you up, that I may show through you my power, and that my namemay be proclaimed in all the earth."214 Then, having said
this, he draws aconclusion that looks both ways, that
is, toward mercy and toward judgment:"Therefore," he
says, "he hath mercy on whom he willeth, and whom he willeth hehardeneth." He showeth mercy out of his great goodness; he
hardeneth out of nounfairness at all. In this way,
neither does he who is saved have a basis for gloryingin
any merit of his own; nor does the man who is damned have a basis forcomplaining of anything except what he has fully merited.
For grace alone separates206Rom. 9:11, 12.207Cf. Mal. 1:2, 3 and Rom. 9:13.208Rom. 9:14.209Rom. 9:15.210Rom. 9:15; see above, IX, 32.211Eph. 2:3.212Rom. 9:16.213I Cor. 1 :31; cf. Jer. 9:24. The religious intention of
Augustine's emphasis upon divine sovereignty and predestination is never so much
to account for the doom of the wicked as to underscore the sheer and wonderful
gratuity of salvation.214Rom. 9:17; cf. Ex. 9:16.42the redeemed from the lost, all
having been mingled together in the one mass ofperdition, arising from a common cause which leads back to
their common origin.But if any man hears this in such a
way as to say: "Why then does he find fault? Forwho
resists his will?"215--as if to make it seem that man should not therefore beblamed for being evil because God "hath mercy on whom he
willeth and whom hewilleth he hardeneth"--God forbid
that we should be ashamed to give the same replyas we
see the apostle giving: "O man, who are you to reply to God? Does the moldedobject say to the molder, 'Why have you made me like this?'
Or is not the pottermaster of his clay, to make from the
same mass one vessel for honorable, anotherfor ignoble,
use?"216There are some stupid men who think that in this
part of the argument theapostle had no answer to give;
and, for lack of a reasonable rejoinder, simplyrebuked
the audacity of his gainsayer. But what he said--"O man, who are you?"--has actually great weight and in an argument like this
recalls man, in a singleword, to consider the limits of
his capacity and, at the same time, supplies animportant
explanation.For if one does not understand these
matters, who is he to talk back to God?And if one does
understand, he finds no better ground even then for talking back.For if he understands, he sees that the whole human race was
condemned in itsapostate head by a divine judgment so
just that not even if a single member of therace were
ever saved from it, no one could rail against God's justice. And he alsosees that those who are saved had to be saved on such terms
that it would show--bycontrast with the greater number
of those not saved but simply abandoned to theirwholly
just damnation--what the whole mass deserved and to what end God'smerited judgment would have brought them, had not his
undeserved mercyinterposed. Thus every mouth of those
disposed to glory in their own merits shouldbe stopped,
so that "he that glories may glory in the Lord."217

CHAPTER XXVITHE
TRIUMPH OF GOD'S SOVEREIGN GOOD WILL

100. These are "the great works of the Lord, well-considered
in all his acts ofwill"218--and so wisely
well-considered that when his angelic and human creationsinned (that is, did not do what he willed, but what it
willed) he could stillaccomplish what he himself had
willed and this through the same creaturely will bywhich
the first act contrary to the Creator's will had been done. As the SupremeGood, he made good use of evil deeds, for the damnation of
those whom he hadjustly predestined to punishment and
for the salvation of those whom he hadmercifully
predestined to grace.For, as far as they were concerned,
they did what God did not will that theydo, but as far
as God's omnipotence is concerned, they were quite unable to achievetheir purpose. In their very act of going against his will,
his will was therebyaccomplished. This is the meaning of
the statement, "The works of the Lord aregreat,
well-considered in all his acts of will"--that in a strange and ineffable
fashioneven that which is done against his will is not
done without his will. For it wouldnot be done without
his allowing it--and surely his permission is not unwilling butwilling--nor would he who is good allow the evil to be done,
unless in hisomnipotence he could bring good even out of
evil.101. Sometimes, however, a man of good will wills
something that God dothnot will, even though God's will
is much more, and much more certainly, good--for215Rom.
9:19.216Rom. 9:20, 21.217I Cor.
1:31.218Ps. 110:2 (Vulgate).43under no circumstances can it ever
be evil. For example, it is a good son's will thathis
father live, whereas it is God's good will that he should die. Or, again, it
canhappen that a man of evil will can will something
that God also willeth with a goodwill--as, for example,
a bad son wills that his father die and this is also God's will.Of course, the former wills what God doth not will, whereas
the latter does willwhat God willeth. Yet the piety of
the one, though he wills not what God willeth, ismore
consonant with God's will than is the impiety of the other, who wills the
samething that God willeth. There is a very great
difference between what is fitting forman to will and
what is fitting for God--and also between the ends to which a mandirects his will--and this difference determines whether an
act of will is to beapproved or disapproved. Actually,
God achieveth some of his purposes--which are,of course,
all good--through the evil wills of bad men. For example, it was throughthe ill will of the Jews that, by the good will of the
Father, Christ was slain for us--adeed so good that when
the apostle Peter would have nullified it he was called"Satan" by him who had come in order to be slain.219 How
good seemed the purposesof the pious faithful who were
unwilling that the apostle Paul should go toJerusalem,
lest there he should suffer the things that the prophet Agabus hadpredicted!220 And yet God had willed that he should suffer
these things for the sakeof the preaching of Christ, and
for the training of a martyr for Christ. And this goodpurpose of his he achieved, not through the good will of the
Christians, but throughthe ill will of the Jews. Yet
they were more fully his who did not will what he willedthan were those who were willing instruments of his
purpose--for while he and thelatter did the very same
thing, he worked through them with a good will, whereasthey did his good will with their ill will.102. But, however strong the wills either of angels or of
men, whether good orevil, whether they will what God
willeth or will something else, the will of theOmnipotent is always undefeated. And this will can never be
evil, because evenwhen it inflicts evils, it is still
just; and obviously what is just is not evil. Therefore,whether through pity "he hath mercy on whom he willeth," or
in justice "whom hewilleth, he hardeneth," the
omnipotent God never doth anything except what hedoth
will, and doth everything that he willeth.

CHAPTER XXVIILIMITS OF
GOD'S PLAN FOR HUMAN SALVATION

103. Accordingly, when we hear and read in sacred Scripture
that God"willeth that all men should be saved,"221
although we know well enough that notall men are saved,
we are not on that account to underrate the fully omnipotent willof God. Rather, we must understand the Scripture, "Who will
have all men to besaved," as meaning that no man is
saved unless God willeth his salvation: not thatthere is
no man whose salvation he doth not will, but that no one is saved unless Hewilleth it. Moreover, his will should be sought in prayer,
because if he willeth, thenwhat he willeth must
necessarily be. And, indeed, it was of prayer to God that theapostle was speaking when he made that statement. Thus, we
are also tounderstand what is written in the Gospel
about Him "who enlighteneth everyman."222 This means
that there is no man who is enlightened except by God.In
any case, the word concerning God, "who will have all men to be saved,"does not mean that there is no one whose salvation he doth
not will--he who wasunwilling to work miracles among
those who, he said, would have repented if he hadwrought
them--but by "all men" we are to understand the whole of mankind, in219Matt. 16:23.220Acts 21:10-12.221I Tim. 2:4.222John 1:9.44every single group into which it
can be divided: kings and subjects; nobility andplebeians; the high and the low; the learned and unlearned;
the healthy and thesick; the bright, the dull, and the
stupid; the rich, the poor, and the middle class;males,
females, infants, children, the adolescent, young adults and middle-aged andvery old; of every tongue and fashion, of all the arts, of
all professions, with thecountless variety of wills and
minds and all the other things that differentiatepeople.
For from which of these groups doth not God will that some men from everynation should be saved through his only begotten Son our
Lord? Therefore, he dothsave them since the Omnipotent
cannot will in vain, whatsoever he willeth.Now, the
apostle had enjoined that prayers should be offered "for all men"223and especially "for kings and all those of exalted
station,"224 whose worldly pompand pride could be
supposed to be a sufficient cause for them to despise the humilityof the Christian faith. Then, continuing his argument, "for
this is good andacceptable in the sight of God our
Saviour"225-- that is, to pray even for such asthese
[kings]--the apostle, to remove any warrant for despair, added, "Who willeththat all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the
truth."226 Truly, then, Godhath judged it good that
through the prayers of the lowly he would deign to grantsalvation to the exalted--a paradox we have already seen
exemplified. Our Lord alsouseth the same manner of
speech in the Gospel, where he saith to the Pharisees,"You tithe mint and rue and every herb."227 Obviously, the
Pharisees did not tithewhat belonged to others, nor all
the herbs of all the people of other lands. Therefore,just as we should interpret "every herb" to mean "every kind
of herb," so also we caninterpret "all men" to mean "all
kinds of men." We could interpret it in any otherfashion, as long as we are not compelled to believe that the
Omnipotent hath willedanything to be done which was not
done. "He hath done all things in heaven andearth,
whatsoever he willed,"228 as Truth sings of him, and surely he hath not
willedto do anything that he hath not done. There must
be no equivocation on this point.

CHAPTER XXVIIITHE
DESTINY OF MAN

104.
Consequently, God would have willed to preserve even the first man inthat state of salvation in which he was created and would
have brought him in dueseason, after the begetting of
children, to a better state without the intervention ofdeath--where he not only would have been unable to sin, but
would not have hadeven the will to sin--if he had
foreknown that man would have had a steadfast willto
continue without sin, as he had been created to do. But since he did foreknowthat man would make bad use of his free will--that is, that
he would sin--Godprearranged his own purpose so that he
could do good to man, even in man's doingevil, and so
that the good will of the Omnipotent should be nullified by the bad willof men, but should nonetheless be fulfilled.105. Thus it was fitting that man should be created, in the
first place, so thathe could will both good and
evil--not without reward, if he willed the good; notwithout punishment, if he willed the evil. But in the future
life he will not have thepower to will evil; and yet
this will not thereby restrict his free will. Indeed, his willwill be much freer, because he will then have no power
whatever to serve sin. Forwe surely ought not to find
fault with such a will, nor say it is no will, or that it isnot rightly called free, when we so desire happiness that we
not only are unwilling223I Tim. 2:1.224I Tim. 2:2.225I Tim. 2:3.226I Tim. 2:4.227Luke 11:42.228Ps. 135:6.45to be miserable, but have no power whatsoever to will it.And, just as in our present state, our soul is unable to
will unhappiness forourselves, so then it will be
forever unable to will iniquity. But the ordered course ofGod's plan was not to be passed by, wherein he willed to
show how good the rationalcreature is that is able not
to sin, although one unable to sin is better.229 So, too, itwas an inferior order of immortality--but yet it was
immortality--in which man wascapable of not dying, even
if the higher order which is to be is one in which man willbe incapable of dying.230106. Human
nature lost the former kind of immortality through the misuse offree will. It is to receive the latter through grace--though
it was to have obtained itthrough merit, if it had not
sinned. Not even then, however, could there have beenany
merit without grace. For although sin had its origin in free will alone, still
freewill would not have been sufficient to maintain
justice, save as divine aid had beenafforded man, in the
gift of participation in the immutable good. Thus, for example,the power to die when he wills it is in a man's own
hands--since there is no one whocould not kill himself
by not eating (not to mention other means). But the bare willis not sufficient for maintaining life, if the aids of food
and other means ofpreservation are lacking.Similarly, man in paradise was capable of self-destruction
by abandoningjustice by an act of will; yet if the life
of justice was to be maintained, his will alonewould not
have sufficed, unless He who made him had given him aid. But, after theFall, God's mercy was even more abundant, for then the will
itself had to be freedfrom the bondage in which sin and
death are the masters. There is no way at all bywhich it
can be freed by itself, but only through God's grace, which is made effectualin the faith of Christ. Thus, as it is written, even the
will by which "the will itself isprepared by the
Lord"231 so that we may receive the other gifts of God throughwhich we come to the Gift eternal--this too comes from
God.107. Accordingly, even the life eternal, which is
surely the wages of goodworks, is called a gift of God
by the apostle. "For the wages of sin," he says, "isdeath; but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus
our Lord."232 Now, wages formilitary service are paid as
a just debit, not as a gift. Hence, he said "the wages ofsin is death," to show that death was not an unmerited pun
ishment for sin but ajust debit. But a gift, unless it
be gratuitous, is not grace. We are, therefore, tounderstand that even man's merited goods are gifts from God,
and when life eternalis given through them, what else do
we have but "grace upon grace returned"233?Man was,
therefore, made upright, and in such a fashion that he could eithercontinue in that uprightness--though not without divine
aid--or become perverted byhis own choice. Whichever of
these two man had chosen, God's will would be done,either by man or at least concerning him. Wherefore, since
man chose to do his ownwill instead of God's, God's will
concerning him was done; for, from the same massof
perdition that flowed out of that common source, God maketh "one vessel forhonorable, another for ignoble use"234; the ones for
honorable use through hismercy, the ones for ignoble use
through his judgment; lest anyone glory in man, or--what
is the same thing--in himself.108. Now, we could not be
redeemed, even through "the one Mediator229Another
example of Augustine's wordplay. Man's original capacities included both the
power not to sin and the power to sin (posse non peccare et posse peccare). In
Adam's original sin, man lost the posse non peccare (the power not to sin) and
retained the posse peccare (the power to sin)--which he continues to exercise.
In the fulfillment of grace, man will have the posse peccare taken away and
receive the highest of all, the power not to be able to sin, non posse peccare.
Cf. On Correction and Grace XXXIII.230Again, a wordplay
between posset non mori and non possit mori.231Prov.
8:35 (LXX).232Rom. 6:23.233Cf.
John 1:16.234Rom. 9:21.46between God and man, Man himself, Christ Jesus,"235 if he
were not also God. Forwhen Adam was made--being made an
upright man--there was no need for amediator. Once sin,
however, had widely separated the human race from God, it wasnecessary for a mediator, who alone was born, lived, and was
put to death withoutsin, to reconcile us to God, and
provide even for our bodies a resurrection to lifeeternal--and all this in order that man's pride might be
exposed and healed throughGod's humility. Thus it might
be shown man how far he had departed from God,when by
the incarnate God he is recalled to God; that man in his contumacy mightbe furnished an example of obedience by the God-Man; that
the fount of grace mightbe opened up; that even the
resurrection of the body--itself promised to theredeemed--might be previewed in the resurrection of the
Redeemer himself; that thedevil might be vanquished by
that very nature he was rejoicing over havingdeceived--all this, however, without giving man ground for
glory in himself, lestpride spring up anew. And if there
are other advantages accruing from so great amystery of
the Mediator, which those who profit from them can see or testify--evenif they cannot be described--let them be added to this
list.

CHAPTER XXIX"THE LAST
THINGS"

109. Now, for the
time that intervenes between man's death and the finalresurrection, there is a secret shelter for his soul, as
each is worthy of rest oraffliction according to what it
has merited while it lived in the body.110. There is no
denying that the souls of the dead are benefited by the pietyof their living friends, when the sacrifice of the Mediator
is offered for the dead, oralms are given in the church.
But these means benefit only those who, when theywere
living, have merited that such services could be of help to them. For there is
amode of life that is neither so good as not to need
such helps after death nor so badas not to gain benefit
from them after death. There is, however, a good mode of lifethat does not need such helps, and, again, one so thoroughly
bad that, when such aman departs this life, such helps
avail him nothing. It is here, then, in this life, thatall merit or demerit is acquired whereby a man's condition
in the life hereafter isimproved or worsened. Therefore,
let no one hope to obtain any merit with God afterhe is
dead that he has neglected to obtain here in this life.So, then, those means which the Church constantly uses in
interceding forthe dead are not opposed to that
statement of the apostle when he said, "For all ofus
shall stand before the tribunal of Christ, so that each may receive according
towhat he has done in the body, whether good or
evil."236 For each man has forhimself while living in
the body earned the merit whereby these means can benefithim [after death]. For they do not benefit all. And yet why
should they not benefitall, unless it be because of the
different kinds of lives men lead in the body?Accordingly, when sacrifices, whether of the altar or of
alms, are offered for thebaptized dead, they are thank
offerings for the very good, propitiations for the notso-very-bad [non valde malis], and, as for the very bad--even
if they are of no help tothe dead--they are at least a
sort of consolation to the living. Where they are ofvalue, their benefit consists either in obtaining a full
forgiveness or, at least, inmaking damnation more
tolerable.111. After the resurrection, however, when the
general judgment has beenheld and finished, the boundary
lines will be set for the two cities: the one of Christ,the other of the devil; one for the good, the other for the
bad--both including angelsand men. In the one group,
there will be no will to sin, in the other, no power to sin,nor any further possibility of dying. The citizens of the
first commonwealth will goon living truly and happily in
life eternal. The second will go on, miserable in death235I Tim. 2:5 (mixed text).236Rom.
14:10; II Cor. 5:10.47eternal,
with no power to die to it. The condition of both societies will then be
fixedand endless. But in the first city, some will
outrank others in bliss, and in thesecond, some will
have a more tolerable burden of misery than others.112.
It is quite in vain, then, that some--indeed very many--yield to merelyhuman feelings and deplore the notion of the eternal
punishment of the damned andtheir interminable and
perpetual misery. They do not believe that such things willbe. Not that they would go counter to divine Scripture--but,
yielding to their ownhuman feelings, they soften what
seems harsh and give a milder emphasis tostatements they
believe are meant more to terrify than to express the literal truth."God will not forget," they say, "to show mercy, nor in his
anger will he shut up hismercy." This is, in fact, the
text of a holy psalm.237 But there is no doubt that it is tobe interpreted to refer to those who are called "vessels of
mercy,"238 those who arefreed from misery not by their
own merits but through God's mercy. Even so, if theysuppose that the text applies to all men, there is no ground
for them further tosuppose that there can be an end for
those of whom it is said, "Thus these shall gointo
everlasting punishment."239 Otherwise, it can as well be thought that there
willalso be an end to the happiness of those of whom the
antithesis was said: "But therighteous into life
eternal."But let them suppose, if it pleases them, that,
for certain intervals of time,the punishments of the
damned are somewhat mitigated. Even so, the wrath of Godmust be understood as still resting on them. And this is
damnation--for this anger,which is not a violent passion
in the divine mind, is called "wrath" in God. Yet evenin
his wrath--his wrath resting on them--he does not "shut up his mercy." This is
notto put an end to their eternal afflictions, but
rather to apply or interpose some littlerespite in their
torments. For the psalm does not say, "To put an end to his wrath,"or, "After his wrath," but, "In his wrath." Now, if this
wrath were all there is [inman's damnation], and even if
it were present only in the slightest degreeconceivable--still, to be lost out of the Kingdom of God, to
be an exile from the Cityof God, to be estranged from
the life of God, to suffer loss of the great abundance ofGod's blessings which he has hidden for those who fear him
and prepared for thosewho hope in him240--this would be
a punishment so great that, if it be eternal, notorments
that we know could be compared to it, no matter how many ages theycontinued.113. The eternal death of
the damned--that is, their estrangement from thelife of
God--will therefore abide without end, and it will be common to them all, nomatter what some people, moved by their human feelings, may
wish to think aboutgradations of punishment, or the
relief or intermission of their misery. In the sameway,
the eternal life of the saints will abide forever, and also be common to all
ofthem no matter how different the grades of rank and
honor in which they shineforth in their effulgent
harmony.

CHAPTER XXXTHE
PRINCIPLES OF CHRISTIAN LIVING: FAITH AND HOPE

114. Thus, from our confession of faith, briefly summarized
in the Creed(which is milk for babes when pondered at
the carnal level but food for strong menwhen it is
considered and studied spiritually), there is born the good hope of thefaithful, accompanied by a holy love.241 But of these
affirmations, all of which oughtfaithfully to be
believed, only those which have to do with hope are contained in the237Cf. Ps. 77:9.238Rom. 9:23.239Matt. 25:46.240Cf. Ps. 31:19.241Note the artificial return to the triadic scheme of the
treatise: faith, hope, and love.48Lord's Prayer. For "cursed is everyone," as the divine
eloquence testified, "who restshis hope in man."242
Thus, he who rests his hope in himself is bound by the bond ofthis curse. Therefore, we should seek from none other than
the Lord God whateverit is that we hope to do well, or
hope to obtain as reward for our good works.115.
Accordingly, in the Evangelist Matthew, the Lord's Prayer may be seento contain seven petitions: three of them ask for eternal
goods, the other four fortemporal goods, which are,
however, necessary for obtaining the eternal goods.For
when we say: "Hallowed be thy name. Thy Kingdom come. Thy will bedone on earth, as it is in heaven"243--this last being
wrongly interpreted by some asmeaning "in body and
spirit"--these blessings will be retained forever. They begin inthis life, of course; they are increased in us as we make
progress, but in theirperfection--which is to be hoped
for in the other life--they will be possessed forever!But when we say: "Give us this day our daily bread. And
forgive us our debts, as weforgive our debtors. And lead
us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil,"244who
does not see that all these pertain to our needs in the present life? In that
lifeeternal--where we all hope to be--the hallowing of
God's name, his Kingdom, and hiswill, in our spirit and
body will abide perfectly and immortally. But in this life weask for "daily bread" because it is necessary, in the
measure required by soul andbody, whether we take the
term in a spiritual or bodily sense, or both. And here tooit is that we petition for forgiveness, where the sins are
committed; here too are thetemptations that allure and
drive us to sinning; here, finally, the evil from which wewish to be freed. But in that other world none of these
things will be found.116. However, the Evangelist Luke,
in his version of the Lord's Prayer, hasbrought
together, not seven, but five petitions. Yet, obviously, there is nodiscrepancy here, but rather, in his brief way, the
Evangelist has shown us how theseven petitions should be
understood. Actually, God's name is even now hallowed inthe spirit, but the Kingdom of God is yet to come in the
resurrection of the body.Therefore, Luke was seeking to
show that the third petition ["Thy will be done"] is arepetition of the first two, and makes this better
understood by omitting it. He thenadds three other
petitions, concerning daily bread, forgiveness of sins, andavoidance of temptation.245 However, what Matthew puts in
the last place, "Butdeliver us from evil," Luke leaves
out, in order that we might understand that itwas
included in what was previously said about temptation. This is, indeed, whyMatthew said, "But deliver us," instead of, "And deliver
us," as if to indicate thatthere is only one
petition--"Will not this, but that"--so that anyone would realizethat he is being delivered from evil in that he is not being
led into temptation.

CHAPTER XXXILOVE

117. And now regarding love, which the apostle says is
greater than the othertwo--that is, faith and hope--for
the more richly it dwells in a man, the better theman in
whom it dwells. For when we ask whether someone is a good man, we arenot asking what he believes, or hopes, but what he loves.
Now, beyond all doubt, hewho loves aright believes and
hopes rightly. Likewise, he who does not love believesin
vain, even if what he believes is true; he hopes in vain, even if what he hopes
foris generally agreed to pertain to true happiness,
unless he believes and hopes forthis: that he may
through prayer obtain the gift of love. For, although it is true thathe cannot hope without love, it may be that there is
something without which, if hedoes not love it, he
cannot realize the object of his hopes. An example of this would242Jer. 17:5.243Matt. 6:9, 10.244Matt. 6:11-13.245Luke 11:2-4.49be if a man hopes for life
eternal--and who is there who does not love that?--and yetdoes not love righteousness, without which no one comes to
it.Now this is the true faith of Christ which the
apostle commends: faith thatworks through love. And what
it yet lacks in love it asks that it may receive, it seeksthat it may find, and knocks that it may be opened unto
it.246 For faith achieveswhat the law commands [fides
namque impetrat quod lex imperat]. And, without thegift
of God--that is, without the Holy Spirit, through whom love is shed abroad inour hearts--the law may bid but it cannot aid [jubere lex
poterit, non juvare].Moreover, it can make of man a
transgressor, who cannot then excuse himself bypleading
ignorance. For appetite reigns where the love of God does not.247118. When, in the deepest shadows of ignorance, he lives
according to theflesh with no restraint of reason--this
is the primal state of man.248 Afterward,when "through
the law the knowledge of sin"249 has come to man, and the HolySpirit has not yet come to his aid--so that even if he
wishes to live according to thelaw, he is
vanquished--man sins knowingly and is brought under the spell and madethe slave of sin, "for by whatever a man is vanquished, of
this master he is theslave"250. The effect of the
knowledge of the law is that sin works in man the wholeround of concupiscence, which adds to the guilt of the first
transgression. And thusit is that what was written is
fulfilled: "The law entered in, that the offense mightabound."251 This is the second state of man.252But if God regards a man with solicitude so that he then
believes in God'shelp in fulfilling His commands, and if
a man begins to be led by the Spirit of God,then the
mightier power of love struggles against the power of the flesh.253 Andalthough there is still in man a power that fights against
him--his infirmity beingnot yet fully healed--yet he
[the righteous man] lives by faith and lives righteouslyin so far as he does not yield to evil desires, conquering
them by his love ofrighteousness. This is the third
stage of the man of good hope.A final peace is in store
for him who continues to go forward in this coursetoward
perfection through steadfast piety. This will be perfected beyond this life
inthe repose of the spirit, and, at the last, in the
resurrection of the body.Of these four different stages
of man, the first is before the law, the second isunder
the law, the third is under grace, and the fourth is in full and perfect
peace.Thus, also, the history of God's people has been
ordered by successive temporalepochs, as it pleased God,
who "ordered all things in measure and number andweight."254 The first period was before the law; the second
under the law, which wasgiven through Moses; the next,
under grace which was revealed through the firstAdvent
of the Mediator."255 This grace was not previously absent from those towhom it was to be imparted, although, in conformity to the
temporal dispensations,it was veiled and hidden. For
none of the righteous men of antiquity could findsalvation apart from the faith of Christ. And, unless Christ
had also been known tothem, he could not have been
prophesied to us--sometimes openly and sometimesobscurely--through their ministry.119. Now, in whichever of these four "ages"--if one can call
them that--the246Matt. 7:7.247Another wordplay on cupiditas and caritas.248An interesting resemblance here to Freud's description of
the Id, the primal core of ourunconscious life.249Rom. 3:20.250II Peter 2:19.251Rom. 5:20.252Compare the
psychological notion of the effect of external moral pressures and their power
to arouse guilt feelings, as in Freud's notion of "superego."253Gal. 5:17.254Wis. 11:21
(Vulgate).255Cf. John 1:17.50grace of regeneration finds a man, then and there all his
past sins are forgiven himand the guilt he contracted in
being born is removed by his being reborn. And sotrue is
it that "the Spirit breatheth where he willeth"256 that some men have neverknown the second "age" of slavery under the law, but begin
to have divine aiddirectly under the new commandment.120. Yet, before a man can receive the commandment, he must,
of course, liveaccording to the flesh. But, once he has
been imbued with the sacrament of rebirth,no harm will
come to him even if he then immediately depart this life--"Whereforeon this account Christ died and rose again, that he might be
the Lord of both theliving and the dead."'257 Nor will
the kingdom of death have dominion over him forwhom He,
who was "free among the dead,"258 died.

CHAPTER XXXIITHE END
OF ALL THE LAW

121. All
the divine precepts are, therefore, referred back to love, of which theapostle says, "Now the end of the commandment is love, out
of a pure heart, and agood conscience and a faith
unfeigned."259 Thus every commandment harks back tolove.
For whatever one does either in fear of punishment or from some carnalimpulse, so that it does not measure up to the standard of
love which the Holy Spiritsheds abroad in our
hearts--whatever it is, it is not yet done as it should be,although it may seem to be. Love, in this context, of course
includes both the love ofGod and the love of our
neighbor and, indeed, "on these two commandments hangall
the Law and the Prophets"260--and, we may add, the gospel and the apostles,
forfrom nowhere else comes the voice, "The end of the
commandment is love,"261 and,"God is love."262Therefore, whatsoever things God commands (and one of these
is, "Thou shaltnot commit adultery"263) and whatsoever
things are not positively ordered but arestrongly
advised as good spiritual counsel (and one of these is, "It is a good thing
fora man not to touch a woman"264)--all of these
imperatives are rightly obeyed onlywhen they are
measured by the standard of our love of God and our love of ourneighbor in God [propter Deum]. This applies both in the
present age and in theworld to come. Now we love God in
faith; then, at sight. For, though mortal menourselves,
we do not know the hearts of mortal men. But then "the Lord willilluminate the hidden things in the darkness and will make
manifest the cogitationsof the heart; and then shall
each one have his praise from God"265--for what will bepraised and loved in a neighbor by his neighbor is just that
which, lest it remainhidden, God himself will bring to
light. Moreover, passion decreases as loveincreases266
until love comes at last to that fullness which cannot be surpassed, "forgreater love than this no one has, that a man lay down his
life for his friends."267Who, then, can explain how
great the power of love will be, when there will be nopassion [cupiditas] for it to restrain or overcome? For,
then, the supreme state of256John 3:8.257Rom. 14:9.258Cf. Ps. 88:5.259ITim. 1:5.260Matt. 22:40.2611Tim. 1:5.262I John 4:16.263Ex. 20:14; Matt. 5:27; etc.264I
Cor. 7:1.265I Cor. 4:5.266Minuitur autem cupiditas caritate crescente.267John 15:23.51true health [summa sanitas] will have been reached, when the
struggle with deathshall be no more.

CHAPTER XXXIIICONCLUSION

122. But somewhere this book must have an end. You can see
for yourselfwhether you should call it an Enchiridion,
or use it as one. But since I have judgedthat your zeal
in Christ ought not to be spurned and since I believe and hope forgood things for you through the help of our Redeemer, and
since I love you greatlyas one of the members of his
body, I have written this book for you--may itsusefulness match its prolixity!--on Faith, Hope, and
Love.